Messages in this thread | | | Subject | Re: [patch] cgroups: disallow attaching kthreadd | From | Mike Galbraith <> | Date | Wed, 04 Apr 2012 12:38:35 +0200 |
| |
On Wed, 2012-04-04 at 00:15 -0700, David Rientjes wrote: > On Tue, 3 Apr 2012, Mike Galbraith wrote: > > > The hazzards of moving kthreadd into a non-root cgroup is still present > > in mainline. Last go 'round stalled with Peter not liking the > > cpuset,cpu per controller specific exclusion. I agree that total > > exclusion is the better option, and below is a respin doing that. > > > > We've been through this several times now iterating between two different > functional changes. I appreciate the persistence, but please, again, > explain why you are doing this at the cgroups level rather than the > cpusets level? > > The last time we discussed this, you had proposed a patch to only do this > for cpusets after the points I'm about to bring up for the fifth time. > Peter ended up not responding and as I remember it didn't have strong > feelings against doing it only for cpusets. And here we are, yet again, > back to the cgroups version.
Suggest a third version.
> There's _nothing_ wrong with attaching a kthread to most cgroups. We do > it for memcg. And now you're trying to break it for ABSOLUTELY NO REASON.
Oh, caps made that so much more legible.
One, I don't see what it's breaking, and two, the reason for this repeat is that the last attempt with cpuset,cpu exclusion did not fly.
I don't care how it gets fixed. I just thought I should mention that the problem is still alive upstream, did that, and was told I should try this way again with CCs.
Ok, so you NAK this way, Peter NAKS the other way, and the bug lives on forever. So be it.
-Mike
| |