linux-kernel - Re: [RFC 0/5] forced comounts for cgroups.

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]

Date:	Wed, 5 Sep 2012 02:14:56 -0700
From:	Tejun Heo <tj@...nel.org>
To:	Glauber Costa <glommer@...allels.com>
Cc:	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, cgroups@...r.kernel.org,
	linux-mm@...ck.org, davej@...hat.com, ben@...adent.org.uk,
	a.p.zijlstra@...llo.nl, pjt@...gle.com, lennart@...ttering.net,
	kay.sievers@...y.org
Subject: Re: [RFC 0/5] forced comounts for cgroups.

On Wed, Sep 05, 2012 at 01:06:39PM +0400, Glauber Costa wrote:
> > Heh, this is tricky to describe and I'm not really following what you
> > mean. 
> 
> Do we really want to start cleaning up all this by changing the
> interface to something that is described as "tricky" ?

The concept is not tricky.  I just can't find the appropriate words.
I *suspect* this can mostly re-use the existing css_set thing.  It
mostly becomes that css_set belongs to the unified hierarchy rather
than each task.  The user interface part isn't trivial and maybe
"don't nest beyond this level" is the only thing reasonable.  Not sure
yet whether that would be enough tho.  Need to think more about it.

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/