linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 8/9] [RFC] Example multi-bindable subsystem: a per-cgroup notes field

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:	Wed, 1 Jul 2009 19:56:28 -0700
From:	Paul Menage <menage@...gle.com>
To:	KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki <kamezawa.hiroyu@...fujitsu.com>
Cc:	lizf@...fujitsu.com, balbir@...ux.vnet.ibm.com,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, akpm@...ux-foundation.org,
	containers@...ts.linux-foundation.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 8/9] [RFC] Example multi-bindable subsystem: a per-cgroup 
	notes field

On Wed, Jul 1, 2009 at 7:48 PM, KAMEZAWA
Hiroyuki<kamezawa.hiroyu@...fujitsu.com> wrote:
>
> Hmm, do we need to this "info" file as subsys ? How about making this as
> default file set ? (if there are users.)
>

That would certainly be possible, and would be an alternative to
having multi-bindable subsystem support.

The advantage of adding multi-bindable subsystems is that you can
avoid bloating the core cgroups code, by putting individual small
cgroups features in their own code modules, and you get to decide at
mount time which features are actually mounted; if they were part of
the core cgroups files, then there would either need to be special
mount options for each separate feature, or else no way to pick which
features were mounted on each hierarchy.

Paul
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/