linux-kernel - Re: [patch 0/2] cpusets, cpu_cgroup: disallow attaching kthreadd

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: <20120405225854.GE29517@google.com>
Date:	Thu, 5 Apr 2012 15:58:54 -0700
From:	Tejun Heo <tj@...nel.org>
To:	David Rientjes <rientjes@...gle.com>
Cc:	Mike Galbraith <mgalbraith@...e.de>,
	Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
	Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>,
	Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra@...llo.nl>,
	Paul Menage <paul@...lmenage.org>,
	LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	Li Zefan <lizefan@...wei.com>
Subject: Re: [patch 0/2] cpusets, cpu_cgroup: disallow attaching kthreadd

Hello,

On Thu, Apr 05, 2012 at 03:55:11PM -0700, David Rientjes wrote:
> > I can see your point but the problem is that it conflicts with the
> > long term direction cgroup is taking and that cgroup seems generally
> > over-engineered to allow too many things which aren't too necessary to
> > the point where it's a giant pain in the ass for the subsystems and
> > people involved, so I'm far more likely to go for chopping down and
> > restricting stuff if it's not strictly necessary.
> 
> How does kthreadd's placement conflict with the long-term direction of 
> cgroups?

Because there's only single hierarchy, random subsystem saying no on
->can_attach() doesn't work.

Thanks.

-- 
tejun
--
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/