linux-kernel - Re: [patch00/05]: Containers(V2)- Introduction

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]

Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.4.64.0609201634450.1955@schroedinger.engr.sgi.com>
Date:	Wed, 20 Sep 2006 16:36:25 -0700 (PDT)
From:	Christoph Lameter <clameter@....com>
To:	Rohit Seth <rohitseth@...gle.com>
cc:	Paul Jackson <pj@....com>, ckrm-tech@...ts.sourceforge.net,
	devel@...nvz.org, npiggin@...e.de, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [patch00/05]: Containers(V2)- Introduction

On Wed, 20 Sep 2006, Rohit Seth wrote:

> > How does the containers implementation under discussion behave if a 
> > process is part of a container and the container is removed?
> It first removes all the tasks belonging to this container (which means
> resetting the container pointers in task_struct and then per page
> container pointer belonging to anonymous pages).  It then clears the
> container pointers in the mapping structure and also in the pages
> belonging to these files.

So the application continues to run unharmed?

Could we equip containers with restrictions on processors and nodes for 
NUMA?

-
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/