On Fri, Dec 12, 2008 at 08:09:08AM -0600, Serge E. Hallyn wrote: > Quoting Grzegorz Nosek (root@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx): > > Hi all, > > > > Is there a good reason for ns_can_attach to restrict moving tasks only > > to direct descentants of the current cgroup? I.e. could the code: > > > > orig = task_cgroup(task, ns_subsys_id); > > if (orig && orig != new_cgroup->parent) > > return -EPERM; > > > > be replaced with: > > > > orig = task_cgroup(task, ns_subsys_id); > > if (orig && !cgroup_is_descendant_of(new_cgroup, orig)) > > return -EPERM; > > > > (for a suitable definition of cgroup_is_descendant_of). It would allow > > moving tasks down the cgroup hierarchy more than one level at a time and > > as far as I can see, would pose no additional problems. > > > > Please keep CC'd, I'm not subscribed. > > Well you can always move it down one level at a time, right? :) Yeah, but I found a patch by Andrea Righi which fits my use case almost 100% [1]. The tasks are moved between cgroups by the kernel, so it's kernel hacking for me either way and I guess modifying ns_can_attach will be cleaner. > But I can't think of any reason why it would be a problem. So > pls feel free to send a patch. Will do. Best regards, Grzegorz Nosek [1] http://lwn.net/Articles/294364/ _______________________________________________ Containers mailing list Containers@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://lists.linux-foundation.org/mailman/listinfo/containers