| 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: <6599ad830907011956i33769d5ek5401e93553d75c59@mail.gmail.com> Date: Wed, 1 Jul 2009 19:56:28 -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 8/9] [RFC] Example multi-bindable subsystem: a per-cgroup notes field On Wed, Jul 1, 2009 at 7:48 PM, KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki<kamezawa.hiroyu@...fujitsu.com> wrote: > > Hmm, do we need to this "info" file as subsys ? How about making this as > default file set ? (if there are users.) > That would certainly be possible, and would be an alternative to having multi-bindable subsystem support. The advantage of adding multi-bindable subsystems is that you can avoid bloating the core cgroups code, by putting individual small cgroups features in their own code modules, and you get to decide at mount time which features are actually mounted; if they were part of the core cgroups files, then there would either need to be special mount options for each separate feature, or else no way to pick which features were mounted on each hierarchy. 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