linux-kernel - Re: cgroup: status-quo and userland efforts

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]

Date:	Tue, 3 Mar 2015 21:38:45 +0000 (UTC)
From:	Luke Leighton <lkcl@...l.net>
To:	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: cgroup: status-quo and userland efforts

Tejun Heo <tj@...> writes:

> 
> Hello, Tim.
> 
> On Wed, Jun 26, 2013 at 08:42:21PM -0700, Tim Hockin wrote:
> > OK, then what I don't know is what is the new interface?  A new cgroupfs?
> 
> It's gonna be a new mount option for cgroupfs.
> 
> > DTF and CPU and cpuset all have "default" groups for some tasks (and
> > not others) in our world today.  DTF actually has default, prio, and
> > "normal".  I was simplifying before.  I really wish it were as simple
> > as you think it is.  But if it were, do you think I'd still be
> > arguing?
> 
> How am I supposed to know when you don't communicate it but just wave
> your hands saying it's all very complicated? 

 i'd say that tejun's got you there, tim.  how is anyone supposed to
 understand or help you to support what your team is doing if the entire
 work - no matter how good it is - is kept secret and proprietary?

 we *know* that secret and proprietary is risky, so why is the company
 that you work for indulging itself in such dangerous practices,
 especially when there appears to be so much at risk here if the only
 mindshare for the work you're doing exists solely and exclusively
 in some "secret lair"?

 my suggestion to you would be to urgently, *urgently* get the *entire*
 set of tools and documentation surrounding what is clearly mission
 critical infrastructure released *immediately* as a software libre
 project.

 and the second suggestion would - if they are amenable - to hire
 tejun and any of his associates - to come over for as long as possible
 and necessary to review what you've been doing, on site, giving
 them carte blanche (or even a remit) to update and refine the online
 documentation.

 without that happening - without there being publicly-available
 documentation - i really don't see how you can be expected to ask
 tejun to understand the complexity of what the team needs, when the
 majority of what you want - and need! - to say you *can't*... because
 you're under some bloody stupid NDA!  that's... insane!

 you *need mindshare*: that means releasing the tools and documentation
 as a software libre project so that, if nothing else, there's other
 people whom the company you work for can poach when they get proficient
 at working with it :)

 l.

--
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/