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 for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <50471782.6060800@parallels.com>
Date:	Wed, 5 Sep 2012 13:12:34 +0400
From:	Glauber Costa <glommer@...allels.com>
To:	Tejun Heo <tj@...nel.org>
CC:	Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra@...llo.nl>,
	<linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, <cgroups@...r.kernel.org>,
	<linux-mm@...ck.org>, <davej@...hat.com>, <ben@...adent.org.uk>,
	<pjt@...gle.com>, <lennart@...ttering.net>, <kay.sievers@...y.org>
Subject: Re: [RFC 0/5] forced comounts for cgroups.

On 09/05/2012 01:11 PM, Tejun Heo wrote:
> Hello, Peter.
> 
> On Wed, Sep 05, 2012 at 11:06:33AM +0200, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
>> *confused* I always thought that was exactly what you meant with unified
>> hierarchy.
> 
> No, I never counted out differing granularity.
> 

Can you elaborate on which interface do you envision to make it work?
They will clearly be mounted in the same hierarchy, or as said
alternatively, comounted.

If you can turn them on/off on a per-subtree basis, which interface
exactly do you propose for that?

Would a pair of cgroup core files like available_controllers and
current_controllers are a lot of drivers do, suffice?
--
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/