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
 
Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.
[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <4AF1AACE.6060705@redhat.com>
Date:	Wed, 04 Nov 2009 17:24:46 +0100
From:	Jan Safranek <jsafrane@...hat.com>
To:	"Serge E. Hallyn" <serue@...ibm.com>
CC:	Dave Hansen <dave@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>, balbir@...ux.vnet.ibm.com,
	Dhaval Giani <dhaval@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>,
	containers@...ts.linux-foundation.org,
	"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	Bharata B Rao <bharata.rao@...ibm.com>,
	libcg-devel <libcg-devel@...ts.sourceforge.net>,
	"menage@...gle.com" <menage@...gle.com>
Subject: Re: [RFC] Mount point suggestions for cgroup

On 11/04/2009 05:11 PM, Serge E. Hallyn wrote:
> Quoting Dave Hansen (dave@...ux.vnet.ibm.com):
>> On Wed, 2009-11-04 at 13:46 +0530, Balbir Singh wrote:
>>> The reason I liked /dev/cgroup was because cpusets could be
>>> mounted at /dev/cpuset or /dev/cgroup/cpuset. My concern with /cgroup
>>> is that a ls "/" now becomes larger in size. But I'll take your vote
>>> for it as +1 for /cgroup.
>>
>> /dev/pts is a decent precedent for doing it under /dev, although it does
>> deal with actual devices.  cgroups do not.
>
> Hmm, on whose behalf are you making this decision?
>
> LSB people will want to avoid using /cgroup,

LSB (and FHS) IMHO does not specify any place for such stuff:

/dev - for devices only, cgroups are not devices
/mnt - for admin temporary mounts and "should not affect the manner in 
which any program is run"
/var - for "any unsorted variable data", cgroups are not "unsorted 
variable data", it's interface to kernel

FHS does not specify either /sys and /selinux and it seems to me nobody 
complains about them.

/sys/cgroup would be the best, if sysfs supported mkdir(). But it does 
not :(. Our kernel guys told me it's relatively easy to create new empty 
directory /sys/cgroup (or /sys/kernel/cgroup), but it must be compiled 
into kernel or a module. Then I could mount some tmpfs to it, create 
/sys/cgroup/cpu, /sys/cgroup/memory etc. and mount the control group 
hierarchies there... but as you can see, it's really really ugly thing 
to do.

Jan
--
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

Powered by Openwall GNU/*/Linux Powered by OpenVZ