| 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
| ||
|
Message-ID: <6599ad830907011952t2e698e77j1e8dba21402bc9a9@mail.gmail.com> Date: Wed, 1 Jul 2009 19:52:16 -0700 From: Paul Menage <menage@...gle.com> To: KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki <kamezawa.hiroyu@...fujitsu.com> Cc: lizf@...fujitsu.com, balbir@...ux.vnet.ibm.com, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, akpm@...ux-foundation.org, containers@...ts.linux-foundation.org Subject: Re: [PATCH 7/9] [RFC] Support multiply-bindable cgroup subsystems On Wed, Jul 1, 2009 at 7:45 PM, KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki<kamezawa.hiroyu@...fujitsu.com> wrote: >> - in the current version of this patch, mounting a cgroups hierarchy >> with no options does *not* get you any of the multi-bindable >> subsystems; possibly for consistency it should give you all of the >> multi-bindable subsystems as well as all of the single-bindable >> subsystems. >> > I don't think this is a big problem. Hmm, I wonder there are no people who > uses cgroup without any options (= mounts all subsys at once)... In practice I suspect that it's a rare usage outside of manual playing/testing - any real production system is going to want to be aware of what subsystems are available and decide which to mount on each hierarchy. > > Wow...seems complicated. How about adding linux/cgroup_multisubsys.h ? I think that the readability benefits in cgroup.c would be outweighed by having two different subsys include files. 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