[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <4EE80564.7030608@cn.fujitsu.com>
Date: Wed, 14 Dec 2011 10:09:40 +0800
From: Li Zefan <lizf@...fujitsu.com>
To: Tejun Heo <tj@...nel.org>
CC: Glauber Costa <glommer@...allels.com>,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, jbottomley@...allels.com,
cgroups@...r.kernel.org, bsingharora@...il.com, devel@...nvz.org,
kamezawa.hiroyu@...fujitsu.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH 3/3] make 'none' field a flag
于 2011年12月13日 23:41, Tejun Heo 写道:
> On Sun, Dec 11, 2011 at 03:45:38PM +0100, Glauber Costa wrote:
>> There is no reason to have a flags field, and then a separate
>> bool field just to indicate if 'none' subsystem were explicitly
>> requested.
>>
>> Make it a flag
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Glauber Costa <glommer@...allels.com>
>
> Same as the previous patch. Doesn't this change how remount
> conditions are checked?
>
Right. The patch prevents us from doing:
# mount -t cgroup -o none,name=tmp xxx /mnt
# mount -o remount,cpuset xxx /mnt
(failed)
--
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