[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20160721155046.GB23759@htj.duckdns.org>
Date: Thu, 21 Jul 2016 11:50:46 -0400
From: Tejun Heo <tj@...nel.org>
To: James Bottomley <James.Bottomley@...senPartnership.com>
Cc: Aleksa Sarai <asarai@...e.de>,
Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>,
Li Zefan <lizefan@...wei.com>,
Johannes Weiner <hannes@...xchg.org>,
"Serge E. Hallyn" <serge.hallyn@...ntu.com>,
Aditya Kali <adityakali@...gle.com>,
Chris Wilson <chris@...is-wilson.co.uk>,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, cgroups@...r.kernel.org,
Christian Brauner <cbrauner@...e.de>, dev@...ncontainers.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v1 3/3] cgroup: relax common ancestor restriction for
direct descendants
Hello, James.
On Thu, Jul 21, 2016 at 08:34:36AM -0700, James Bottomley wrote:
> So if I as the cgroup ns owner am moving a task from A to A_subdir, the
> admin scanning tasks in all of A may miss this task in motion because
> all the tasks files can't be scanned atomically?
So, the admin just wants to move processes from A and only A to B. It
doesn't wanna interfere with processes in the subdirs or on-going ns
operations, but if the race occurs, both A -> B migration and ns
subdir operation would succeed and the end result would be something
neither expects.
Thanks.
--
tejun
Powered by blists - more mailing lists