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]
Date:	Thu, 23 Feb 2012 15:13:19 +0100
From:	Peter Zijlstra <>
To:	Vivek Goyal <>
Cc:	Tejun Heo <>, Li Zefan <>,,,
	Andrew Morton <>,
	Kay Sievers <>,
	Lennart Poettering <>,
	Frederic Weisbecker <>,, Christoph Hellwig <>
Subject: Re: [RFD] cgroup: about multiple hierarchies

On Thu, 2012-02-23 at 10:41 +0100, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> If your complete control is % based then I would assume its a % of a %.
> Simple enough.
> If its bandwidth based then simply don't allow a child to consume more
> bandwidth than its parent, also simple.
> If your layman isn't capable of grokking that, he should stay the f*ck
> away from it. 

Fact is, the scheduler does both these things, so there's absolutely no
reason for other controllers not to do so too. Its the only sensible
thing if you want hierarchy.

My utter disregard for cgroups comes from having to actually implement a
controller for them, its a frigging nightmare. The systemd retards
mandating all this nonsense for booting a machine is completely bonghit
inspired and hasn't made me feel any better about it.

To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to
More majordomo info at
Please read the FAQ at

Powered by blists - more mailing lists