Messages in this thread |  | | | Date | Wed, 4 Apr 2012 16:09:22 -0700 | | From | Tejun Heo <> | | Subject | Re: [patch] cgroups: disallow attaching kthreadd |
| |
On Wed, Apr 04, 2012 at 02:17:36PM -0700, David Rientjes wrote: > On Wed, 4 Apr 2012, Mike Galbraith wrote: > > > > I've never seen a nack from Peter on this, I only remember discussing > > > whether this needs to be isolated to only cpusets or whether it needs to > > > be a generic cgroup thing and I've always argued in favor of localizing it > > > to cpusets because that cgroup happens to care about cpu affinity where > > > others don't and this is why cgroups have ->can_attach() functions. If a > > > cgroup were created to have nothing to do with cpu affinity (only for > > > collecting statistics for threads within it, for example), there's > > > absolutely no reason why we need to exclude kthreadd. > > > > Well, he didn't actually say "NAK", but was against it, which means > > pretty much the same thing as NAK to me.. we can call it a nak. > > > > People are able to change their minds and after our discussion about > cgroups vs cpusets, I was under the impression we were at a common > understanding of the problem. > > Cpusets are a cgroup. It wouldn't make much sense to NACK a patch that > does this to cpusets if you're arguing in favor of doing it for all > cgroups. > > Your changelog mentions only cpusets issues, not cgroup issues. > > So please propose your cpusets version so that the issue can be fixed. If > Peter wants to extend that to cgroups later, that's a discussion we can > have at that time. However, the bug being addressed here is for cpusets > and is deserving of a patch now rather than later. I'm concerned we're > just going to drop this again and it will live on.
I don't see much problem with the proposed solution and am gonna take it unless there are pretty good reasons not to.
Thanks.
-- tejun
|  |