On Fri 28-06-13 14:01:55, Vivek Goyal wrote: > On Fri, Jun 28, 2013 at 05:05:13PM +0200, Michal Hocko wrote: [...] > > OK, so libcgroup's rules daemon will still work and place my tasks in > > appropriate cgroups? > > Do you use that daemon in practice? I am not but my users do. And that is why I care. > For user session logins, I think systemd has plans to put user > sessions in a cgroup (kind of making pam_cgroup redundant). > > Other functionality rulesengined was providing moving tasks automatically > in a cgroup based on executable name. I think that was racy and not > many people had liked it. It doesn't make sense for short lived processes, all right, but it can be useful for those that live for a long time. > IIUC, systemd can't disable access to cgroupfs from other utilities. The previous messages read otherwise. And that is why this rised the red flag at many fronts. > So most likely rulesengined should contine to work. But having both > systemd and libcgroup might not make much sense though. > > Thanks > Vivek -- Michal Hocko SUSE Labs -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe cgroups" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
