Quoting Li Zefan (lizf@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx): > Paul Menage wrote: > > On Wed, Jul 1, 2009 at 7:17 PM, Li Zefan<lizf@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > >> But I guess we are going to fix the bug for 2.6.31? So is it ok to > >> merge a new feature 'cgroup.procs' together into 2.6.31? > >> > > > > Does this bug really need to be fixed for 2.6.31? I didn't think that > > the namespace support in mainline was robust enough yet for people to > > use them for virtual servers in production environments. I don't know where the bar is for 'production environments', but I'd have to claim that pid namespaces are there... > If so, it's ok for me. Unless someone else has objections. Serge? Well, on the one hand it's not a horrible bug in that at least it won't crash the kernel. But what bugs me is that there is no workaround for userspace, no way for an admin to know that if he does for t in `cat /cgroup/victim/tasks`; do kill $t; done he won't kill his mysql server. I think that's a bad enough risk to make it worth trying to push Li's patch. Surely changing Ben's procs file should be pretty trivial to rebase? thanks, -serge _______________________________________________ Containers mailing list Containers@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://lists.linux-foundation.org/mailman/listinfo/containers
