linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v4 2/2] cgroups: add a pids subsystem

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] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:	Thu, 12 Mar 2015 11:35:53 -0400
From:	Austin S Hemmelgarn <ahferroin7@...il.com>
To:	Aleksa Sarai <cyphar@...har.com>
CC:	Tejun Heo <tj@...nel.org>, lizefan@...wei.com, mingo@...hat.com,
	peterz@...radead.org, richard@....at,
	Frédéric Weisbecker 
	<fweisbec@...il.com>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	cgroups@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 2/2] cgroups: add a pids subsystem

On 2015-03-11 22:28, Aleksa Sarai wrote:
>> I did not necessarily word this very clearly.  What I meant is that
>> /proc/sys/kernel/pid_max is essentially an external limiting factor that
>> caps the total number of pids that can be under the root cgroup and it's
>> children, not that the cgroup in any way payed attention to it.  It might be
>> useful to be able to just disable the sysctl option and set the value
>> through the root cgroup, solely or consistency, although such usage isn't
>> something I would consider essential in any way.
>
> Maybe this is something that can be reviewed as a separate patchset to this
> one? I'd much prefer that we actually get per-cgroup process limiting merged
> first, then deal with such features separately.
My thought exactly.

--
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/