[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <6599ad830902261628k4ce8e1aflb7981672562801fb@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 26 Feb 2009 16:28:11 -0800
From: Paul Menage <menage@...gle.com>
To: Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>
Cc: KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki <kamezawa.hiroyu@...fujitsu.com>,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
containers@...ts.linux-foundation.org, lizf@...fujitsu.com,
balbir@...ux.vnet.ibm.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/2] cgroup allow subsys to set default mode of its own
file
On Thu, Feb 26, 2009 at 1:00 PM, Andrew Morton
<akpm@...ux-foundation.org> wrote:
> On Wed, 25 Feb 2009 16:35:55 +0900
> KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki <kamezawa.hiroyu@...fujitsu.com> wrote:
>
>> When I wrote tools for maintain cgroup, I can't find which file is
>> writable intarfece or not via cgroup file systems. (finally, I did
>> dirty approach.)
>> IMHO, showing "this file is read-only" in explicit way is useful
>> for user-land (tools). In other story, a file whose name sounds read-only
>> may have "trigger" operation and support reseting. In this case,
>> "writable" is informative.
>
> Well, we have compatibility issues here. If we make this change, and
> people write tools which depend upon that change then those tools might
> break when run upon older kernels.
I don't think that's too big a deal - a write can always fail at the
whim of a cgroups subsystem, so this would just be a hint to a tool
that it shouldn't even bother trying to write to the file. It should
be able to handle a failure.
But I don't see why we can't figure out the mode automatically based
on whether or not there's a write handler defined for the control
file.
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/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists