Paul Menage wrote: > On 10/4/07, Balbir Singh <balbir@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: >> Forbidding writing to the root resource counter is a policy decision >> I am unable to make up my mind about. It sounds right, but unless >> we have a notion of unlimited resources, I am a bit concerned about >> taking away this flexibility. > > One big reason for doing this is to make virtualization easier - if > you expect not to be able to write to your root cgroup's limits files, > then it's easier to make them non-writeable for a virtual server. > Can't we handle that through file system permissions? virtual servers will not run as root >>>> One arguable drawback to this patch is that the use of memparse() is >>>> lost in the cleanup. Having said that, given the existing of shell >>>> arithmetic, it's not clear to me that typing >>>> >> memparse(), makes it so much easier, we need to use it. >> >>>> echo $[2<<30] > memory.limit >>>> >> Very geeky! I don't like it personally > > Why do you dislike it? Do you really believe that anyone using this > interface by hand isn't going to know that MB is 2^20 and GB is 2^30? > But system administrators deal with memory in MB and GB. When you go to buy memory, you don't specify, I need 1 << 30 or 2^30 bytes of memory :-). Most administrators track their memory using these quantifiers. >> Do read_uint() and write_uint(), just read and write unsigned >> integers? > > Correct. > Oops.. that would be problem, what if I wanted to set my limit to unsigned long long max? > Paul -- Warm Regards, Balbir Singh Linux Technology Center IBM, ISTL _______________________________________________ Containers mailing list Containers@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://lists.linux-foundation.org/mailman/listinfo/containers