| 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: Tue, 3 Feb 2009 19:49:15 +0100 From: Mike Hommey <mh@...ndium.org> To: Paul Menage <menage@...gle.com> Cc: Gustavo Noronha <kov@...ian.org>, debian-devel@...ts.debian.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org Subject: Re: cgroup mount point On Tue, Feb 03, 2009 at 08:55:34AM -0800, Paul Menage wrote: > 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. Like with /sys/fs/fuse/connections ? Come on, there is no problem with a virtual filesystem mounted on top of another. 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