| 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: Mon, 12 Mar 2007 19:49:05 +0530 From: Srivatsa Vaddagiri <vatsa@...ibm.com> To: Paul Jackson <pj@....com> Cc: sekharan@...ibm.com, ckrm-tech@...ts.sourceforge.net, xemul@...ru, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, rohitseth@...gle.com, ebiederm@...ssion.com, mbligh@...gle.com, winget@...gle.com, containers@...ts.osdl.org, serue@...ibm.com, menage@...gle.com, dev@...ru, devel@...nvz.org Subject: Re: [ckrm-tech] [PATCH 1/7] containers (V7): Generic container system abstracted from cpusets code On Sun, Mar 11, 2007 at 12:38:43PM -0700, Paul Jackson wrote: > The primary reason for the cpuset double locking, as I recall, was because > cpusets needs to access cpusets inside the memory allocator. "needs to access cpusets" - can you be more specific? Being able to safely walk cpuset->parent list - is it the only access you are talking of or more? -- Regards, vatsa - 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