linux-kernel - Re: boot cgroup questions

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: <6599ad830803121216y32b88d15r462aac437142d814@mail.gmail.com>
Date:	Wed, 12 Mar 2008 12:16:26 -0700
From:	"Paul Menage" <menage@...gle.com>
To:	"Paul Jackson" <pj@....com>
Cc:	maxk@...lcomm.com, mingo@...e.hu, a.p.zijlstra@...llo.nl,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: boot cgroup questions

On Tue, Mar 11, 2008 at 9:59 PM, Paul Jackson <pj@....com> wrote:
>
>  Paul M -- could we take a different tack here -- extend cgroups to map
>  -either- tasks or irqs to the managed resources?

Not cgroups, no. If you really wanted to extend cpusets specifically
to allow irqs to be assigned to a cpuset to control which cpus they
could execute on, then that might be a possibility. But I don't see
how this would be useful for any other cgroup subsystem, so it doesn't
belong in the generic framework.

My feeling is that just using a simple bitmask assignment, unrelated
to cpusets or cgroups, as Max suggested in his later email is the way
to go.

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/