| 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
| ||
|
Date: Wed, 12 Jan 2011 09:47:19 +0100 From: Mike Galbraith <efault@....de> To: bharata@...ux.vnet.ibm.com Cc: Yong Zhang <yong.zhang0@...il.com>, Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra@...llo.nl>, Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org Subject: Re: [patch] Re: autogroup: sched_setscheduler() fails On Wed, 2011-01-12 at 13:36 +0530, Bharata B Rao wrote: > On Wed, Jan 12, 2011 at 08:24:41AM +0100, Mike Galbraith wrote: > > Yes, it's supposed to be transparent to cgroups. > > If cgroups doesn't want that task and if its transparent to cgroups, > why is it shown as part of /cgroups/tasks ? The task really doesn't > belong in there. Its not on the runqueue of root_task_group. > > So basically I feel that a task consumed by autogroup shouldn't ideally be > shown in root cgroup's tasks file. >From cgroups' viewpoint, root is where it's at. The task isn't consumed by autogroup either, it's only borrowed until cgroups claims it. Would you prefer that when you mount /cgroups, you see a nearly empty root task list because box was booted with autogroup enabled? Should tasks appear and disappear on the fly while you're watching? The goal is peaceful coexistence. The user can turn either or both both on/off at his/her whim. -Mike -- 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/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists