Conflicts with libvirt cgroup
ghedo opened this issue · 8 comments
Apparently ulatencyd moves around cgroups that it shouldn't touch (e.g. the libvirt one). See Debian bug #629380 for more information (there are some outputs of ulatency which should help to understand the problem).
Would it be possible for ulatencyd to simply ignore existing cgroups (i.e. not created by ulatencyd itself) and their processes?
I already implemented a safty net, but it is not used yet. Will do so for the next update that is in the works.
when can we get that update?
See my fixes/issue29 branch https://github.com/gajdusek/ulatencyd/commits/fixes/issue29
i'm using it, it works nicely
thanks
On Tue, Jul 31, 2012 at 06:32:52PM -0700, Petr Gajdůšek wrote:
See my fixes/issue29 branch https://github.com/gajdusek/ulatencyd/commits/fixes/issue29
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub:
#29 (comment)
1AE0 322E B8F7 4717 BDEA BF1D 44BB 1BA7 9F6C 6333
@gajdusek is your fix completed? If so, would you open a pull request so that your changes could be shipped to the downstream packages?
I use Ubuntu 12.04 and is affected by this bug.
I'm not familiar with the development and shipping process so if I've made an unreasonable request you can just ignore me, thanks!
Hi pellaeon,
yes it is fixed but I doubt it would be easy or beneficial to make a pull request. There are many more bugs fixed in the fork and some of them are probably needed for fixing this issue. The patch would require heavy testing. Next I am not able to maintain all the branches with not merged fixes, I gave up long time ago.
You can try my fork instead. I have Debian source package which I can provide or I can provide the deb packages if you don't know how to build packages. IMHO, no additional changes should be needed for Ubuntu.
Petr
Great, I would like the deb packages, thanks a lot!
2013/3/11 上午5:20 於 "Petr Gajdůšek" notifications@github.com 寫道：
Hi pellaeon,
yes it is fixed but I doubt it would be easy or beneficial to make a pull
request. There are many more bugs fixed in the fork and some of them are
probably needed for fixing this issue. The patch would require heavy
testing. Next I am not able to maintain all the branches with not merged
fixes, I gave up long time ago.You can try my fork instead. I have Debian source package which I can
provide or I can provide the deb packages if you don't know how to build
packages. IMHO, no additional changes should be needed for Ubuntu.Petr
—
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHubhttps://github.com//issues/29#issuecomment-14689566
.