Conversation
f213f8d to
d097cab
Compare
|
It'd be easier to review (and cleaner git log for reading and/or bisecting) if the cosmetic changes and functional changes were separated into different commits. |
d097cab to
94c9345
Compare
tried my best to split them, tho 4/5 will still be a big commit since it changes the internal cgroups api |
94c9345 to
9931622
Compare
That's fine. I don't suggest splitting needlessly just to reduce commit size. If a cosmetic change unintentionally changes functionality then it's not immediately obvious whether it was intentional or not if it's lumped into a functional commit. Having them on their own commit makes this clearer. |
move into a new layout with a supervision root cgroup as /rc, services will then go in /rc/$RC_SVCNAME, and compatibility with the old /openrc.$RC_SVCNAME is kept though restarting a service will use the new layout this also fixes a bug where cgroup_cleanup would not ever trigger due to a bug in cgroup_running
9931622 to
4a30051
Compare
add a deprecation warning for cgroups v1, and rework rc-cgroups.sh into cgroups.sh with an api focused on cgroups v2
move into a new layout with a supervision root cgroup as /rc, services will then go in /rc/$RC_SVCNAME, and compatibility with the old /openrc.$RC_SVCNAME is kept though restarting a service will use the new layout
this also fixes a bug where cgroup_cleanup would not ever trigger due to a bug in cgroup_running
i'll also add support for cgroups in user services to this PR later