Serge wrote:
> Paul (Jackson), is this comment added in cpusets close enough to what
> you were asking for?
This comment?
+ * Currently we refuse to set up the container - thereby
+ * refusing the task to be entered, and as a result refusing
+ * the sys_unshare() or clone() which initiated it - if any
+ * sibling cpusets have exclusive cpus or mem.
+ *
+ * If this becomes a problem for some users who wish to
+ * allow that scenario, then cpuset_post_clone() could be
+ * changed to grant parent->cpus_allowed-sibling_cpus_exclusive
+ * (and likewise for mems) to the new container.
Nice - thanks.
--
I won't rest till it's the best ...
Programmer, Linux Scalability
Paul Jackson <pj@xxxxxxx> 1.925.600.0401
_______________________________________________
Containers mailing list
Containers@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
https://lists.linux-foundation.org/mailman/listinfo/containers
