On Thu, Apr 17, 2014 at 12:16 PM, Vivek Goyal <vgoyal@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > On Thu, Apr 17, 2014 at 03:10:17PM -0400, Simo Sorce wrote: > > [..] >> At this point I think journald people need to give a little bit more >> details on how they plan to use SO_PASSCGROUP. >> >> For my use cases I care only about streams and SO_PEERCGROUP that does >> not have any of the (perceived) issues of SO_PASSCGROUP. > > Ok, so we agree that SO_PEERCGROUP is not a problem. And it solves the > problem for some of the use cases. > > And there is lot of contention on the SO_PASSCGROUP option. > > So how about taking one step at a time. Get SO_PEERCGROUP in first and > then get into more details on how SO_PASSCGROUP will exactly be used and > then decide what to do. My only objection to SO_PEERCGROUP is that I don't believe that a legitimate use case exists. I think the feature itself is safe to add. --Andy -- 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
