lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2011]   [Dec]   [6]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: [patch-final] Re: patch] cpusets, cgroups: disallow attaching kthreadd
On Tue, 6 Dec 2011 12:13:10 -0800 (PST)
David Rientjes <rientjes@google.com> wrote:

> On Thu, 10 Nov 2011, David Rientjes wrote:
>
> > On Wed, 26 Oct 2011, David Rientjes wrote:
> >
> > > On Wed, 19 Oct 2011, Mike Galbraith wrote:
> > >
> > > > cpusets, cgroups: disallow attaching kthreadd
> > > >
> > > > Allowing kthreadd to be moved to a non-root group makes no sense, it being
> > > > a global resource, and needlessly leads unsuspecting users toward trouble.
> > > >
> > > > 1. An RT workqueue worker thread spawned in a task group with no rt_runtime
> > > > allocated is not schedulable. Simple user error, but harmful to the box.
> > > >
> > > > 2. A worker thread which acquires PF_THREAD_BOUND can never leave a cpuset,
> > > > rendering the cpuset immortal.
> > > >
> > > > Save the user some unexpected trouble, just say no.
> > > >
> > > > Signed-off-by: Mike Galbraith <efault@gmx.de>
> > > > Acked-by: David Rientjes <rientjes@google.com>
> > > > Acked-by: Paul Menage <paul@paulmenage.org>
> > > >
> > >
> > > Let's add Andrew to the cc so we can get it in -mm, I haven't seen it hit
> > > linux-next yet.
> > >
> >
> > Ping? Still missing from -mm and linux-next.
> >
>
> Ping #2?
>

Why am I being pinged about scheduler patches? My sole contribution
to this one is to point out that "its"->possessive and "it's"->"it is".

Also, Peter has said

: I really think that if we want to restrain userspace from doing
: something stupid we might as well do something that makes sense, and
: that is mandate kthreadd stays in the root group at all times for
: everybody.

which appears to be what the patch already did, so I'm confused again.

It's time for a fresh resend, IMO.


\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2011-12-06 23:49    [from the cache]
©2003-2011 Jasper Spaans