On 03/04/2020 17.45, Tejun Heo wrote:
On Fri, Apr 03, 2020 at 05:37:17PM +0300, Konstantin Khlebnikov wrote:
How would this work with things like inetd? Would it make sense to associate the
socket on the first actual send/recv?
First send/recv seems too intrusive.
Intrusive in terms of?
In term of adding more code to networking fast paths.
Setsockopt to change association to current cgroup (or by id) seems more reasonable.
I'm not sure about exposing it as an explicit interface.
Yep, it's better to create thing in right place from the beginning.
Current behaviour isn't bad, just not obvious (and barely documented).
That's why I've asked Dmitry to add these notes.
Thanks.
