[lkml]   [2011]   [Jan]   [27]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
SubjectRe: [PATCH] cgroup : remove the ns_cgroup
On 01/27/2011 02:45 AM, Andrew Morton wrote:
> On Thu, 27 Jan 2011 09:08:51 +0800 Li Zefan<> wrote:
>> Andrew Morton wrote:
>>> On Tue, 25 Jan 2011 10:39:48 +0100
>>> Daniel Lezcano<> wrote:
>>>> This patch removes the ns_cgroup as suggested in the following thread:
>>> I had this patch queued up in September last year, but dropped it. Why
>>> did I do that?
>> Because you wanted to wait for some time for users (if any) to notice this
>> coming change.
>> Author: Daniel Lezcano<>
>> Date: Wed Oct 27 15:33:38 2010 -0700
>> cgroup: notify ns_cgroup deprecated
>> The ns_cgroup will be removed very soon. Let's warn, for this version,
>> ns_cgroup is deprecated.
>> Make ns_cgroup and clone_children exclusive. If the clone_children is set
>> and the ns_cgroup is mounted, let's fail with EINVAL when the ns_cgroup
>> subsys is created (a printk will help the user to understand why the
>> creation fails).
>> Update the feature remove schedule file with the deprecated ns_cgroup.
>> Signed-off-by: Daniel Lezcano<>
>> Acked-by: Paul Menage<>
>> Signed-off-by: Andrew Morton<>
>> Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds<>
> ooh, that was clever of me.
> Here is the text which was missing from the changelog:
> This is a userspace-visible change. Commit 45531757b45c ("cgroup:
> notify ns_cgroup deprecated") (merged into 2.6.27) caused the kernel
> to emit a printk warning users that the feature is planned for
> removal. Since that time we have heard from XXX users who were
> affected by this.
> Please provide XXX.

Ok, AFAIK nobody makes use of the ns_cgroup except the LXC userspace
tools which I maintain and where
the backward compatibility with the ns_cgroup and the clone_children
flag is already implemented.
Since today nobody seems to be affected by this.

I Cc'ed the libvirt mailing list.

> How do we know that 2.6.37->2.6.38 is long enough? Will any major
> distros be released containing this warning in that timeframe? I doubt
> it.

Hmm, maybe it is too short but I don't think someone will complain about
this feature removal.
Google chromium is using the namespaces, hence a lot of cgroup is
created on the system. The vsftpd and some pam modules uses the
namespaces too.
I won't be surprised if one of these applications fails with 'clone'
returning EEXIST ...

 \ /
  Last update: 2011-01-27 09:53    [W:0.058 / U:18.524 seconds]
©2003-2018 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site