On Thu, Jun 18, 2009 at 11:36 AM, Daniel Lezcano<daniel.lezcano@xxxxxxx> wrote: > > There isn't a rule saying that we will inherit the values set by the parent > ? If it is case, maybe we can remove the ns_cgroup and fix the cpuset at the > same time, no ? There's no rule either way, but there is the backward-compatibility aspects of cpusets. One way around that would be to add a "cgroup.clone_children" control file - if you write 1 to it (it defaults to 0) then all mkdir operations do a clone (i.e. pre-populate the child with appropriate defaults even if that's not the normal behaviour for the subsystem. That would avoid compatibility issues. > Maybe, we can first fix the ns_cgroup hook problem by moving the > ns_cgroup_clone after cgroup_fork_callbacks You mean fork the task into the parent cgroup, then clone the new cgroup and reattach to the new cgroup? That could work, although I'm not sure whether it would be bad to have the new task briefly appearing in the parent cgroups. Paul _______________________________________________ Containers mailing list Containers@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://lists.linux-foundation.org/mailman/listinfo/containers
