On Tue, 25 Jan 2011 10:39:48 +0100 Daniel Lezcano <daniel.lezcano@xxxxxxx> wrote: > The ns_cgroup is an annoying cgroup at the namespace / cgroup frontier > and leads to some problems: > > * cgroup creation is out-of-control > * cgroup name can conflict when pids are looping > * it is not possible to have a single process handling > a lot of namespaces without falling in a exponential creation time > * we may want to create a namespace without creating a cgroup > > The ns_cgroup was replaced by a compatibility flag 'clone_children', > where a newly created cgroup will copy the parent cgroup values. > The userspace has to manually create a cgroup and add a task to > the 'tasks' file. > > This patch removes the ns_cgroup as suggested in the following thread: > > https://lists.linux-foundation.org/pipermail/containers/2009-June/018616.html > > The 'cgroup_clone' function is removed because it is no longer used. > > Signed-off-by: Daniel Lezcano <daniel.lezcano@xxxxxxx> > Signed-off-by: Serge E. Hallyn <serge.hallyn@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> > Cc: Eric W. Biederman <ebiederm@xxxxxxxxxxxx> > Cc: Jamal Hadi Salim <hadi@xxxxxxxxxx> > Reviewed-by: Li Zefan <lizf@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> > Acked-by: Paul Menage <menage@xxxxxxxxxx> > Acked-by: Matt Helsley <matthltc@xxxxxxxxxx> > > ... > > 22 files changed, 4 insertions(+), 287 deletions(-) I didn't see that one coming. This change is userspace-visible, is it not? What are the implications of this? There's some discussion in that nearly-two-year-old thread regarding making provision for back-compatibility but I'm not seeing such things in this patch? _______________________________________________ Containers mailing list Containers@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://lists.linux-foundation.org/mailman/listinfo/containers
