linux-kernel - Re: cgroup mount point

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:	Tue, 3 Feb 2009 08:55:34 -0800
From:	Paul Menage <menage@...gle.com>
To:	Gustavo Noronha <kov@...ian.org>
Cc:	debian-devel@...ts.debian.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: cgroup mount point

On Tue, Feb 3, 2009 at 6:38 AM, Gustavo Noronha <kov@...ian.org> wrote:
> On Tue, 2009-02-03 at 23:44 +1100, Ben Finney wrote:
>> I agree with all that Thadeu Lima says here. I would add that cgroups
>> are nothing to do with device nodes, so definitely don't belong in
>> '/dev/' either.
>>
>> Since they're a filesystem mapping "for browsing and manipulation
>> from user space" of a kernel facility, I think '/sys/cgroups/' is
>> appropriate.
>
> I agree with this point of view. I believe /sys/cgroups is the way to
> go. Now, of course this has the drawback of shadowing something future
> versions of Linux would make available at that same path, but I am
> pretty sure they would be careful not to do that after distributions
> have settled on a standard path.

Having one virtual filesystem mounted on top of another virtual
filesystem seems like a recipe for problems. /dev/cgroup or
/dev/cgroup/<hierarchy_name> sounds more reasonable to me (although if
anyone is still using devfs that would suffer from the same drawbacks)

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/