linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH -next] cgroup: increase maximum subsystem count from 16 to 32

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

Message-ID: <stsf73lnkx2luuak3a7oi3q4l5axosrxogi2lncw4dkndnc2ge@3tioqa6ww5q7>
Date: Fri, 30 Jan 2026 11:22:18 +0100
From: Michal Koutný <mkoutny@...e.com>
To: Chen Ridong <chenridong@...weicloud.com>
Cc: tj@...nel.org, hannes@...xchg.org, rostedt@...dmis.org, 
	mhiramat@...nel.org, mathieu.desnoyers@...icios.com, inwardvessel@...il.com, 
	shakeel.butt@...ux.dev, cgroups@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, 
	linux-trace-kernel@...r.kernel.org, lujialin4@...wei.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH -next] cgroup: increase maximum subsystem count from 16
 to 32

On Thu, Jan 29, 2026 at 05:51:33PM +0800, Chen Ridong <chenridong@...weicloud.com> wrote:
> We compiled with 'make allmodconfig'.

A-ha.

> The BUILD_BUG_ON(CGROUP_SUBSYS_COUNT > 16) macro worked correctly.

Good.

> Can I propose increasing the maximum number now? If we switch certain configs to
> default N and then a new subsystem is added later, the default configuration may
> work fine, but it will become a problem under allmodconfig — which some users
> actually rely on.
> 
> Besides, this shouldn't be a major change, right?

I'd like there to be gradual move away from legacy controllers code
captured in config defaults.
Could you adjust the commit message to stress out the allmodconfig tests?

The change is OK technically.

Thanks,
Michal

Download attachment "signature.asc" of type "application/pgp-signature" (266 bytes)