[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <1237537460.24626.32.camel@twins>
Date: Fri, 20 Mar 2009 09:24:20 +0100
From: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
To: "Serge E. Hallyn" <serue@...ibm.com>
Cc: lkml <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Dhaval Giani <dhaval@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>, mingo@...e.hu,
Bharata B Rao <bharata@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>,
Linux Containers <containers@...ts.osdl.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/1] introduce user_ns inheritance in user-sched
On Thu, 2009-03-19 at 16:16 -0500, Serge E. Hallyn wrote:
> In a kernel compiled with CONFIG_USER_SCHED=y, cpu shares are
> allocated according to uid. Shares are specifiable under
> /sys/kernel/uids/<uid>/
>
> In a kernel compiled with CONFIG_USER_NS=y, clone(2) with the
> CLONE_NEWUSER flag creates a new user namespace, and the newly
> cloned task will belong to uid 0 in the new user namespace.
We seem to be adding more and more stuff for USER_SCHED, is anybody
actually using that cruft?
How far along with cgroups are we to fully simulate that behaviour?
I think if we have a capable cgroup based replacement for USER_SCHED we
should axe it from the kernel, would save lots of code...
--
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