Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1752415AbeAJW1h (ORCPT + 1 other); Wed, 10 Jan 2018 17:27:37 -0500 Received: from mail-qk0-f172.google.com ([209.85.220.172]:36312 "EHLO mail-qk0-f172.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751957AbeAJW1f (ORCPT ); Wed, 10 Jan 2018 17:27:35 -0500 X-Google-Smtp-Source: ACJfBosE5ZqNjay2FreOnAw/fwAi3xbXobLfuPazPtW0ce5RwLyblkWg0t5ek1X2lKFkIwq/3dp2Ew== Date: Wed, 10 Jan 2018 14:27:26 -0800 From: Tejun Heo To: "Michael Kerrisk (man-pages)" Cc: "Serge E. Hallyn" , linux-man , lkml , cgroups@vger.kernel.org, Roman Gushchin Subject: Re: cgroups(7): documenting cgroups v2 delegation Message-ID: <20180110222726.GG3460072@devbig577.frc2.facebook.com> References: <20180108141450.GP3668920@devbig577.frc2.facebook.com> <6c9fdaee-739f-164d-d04e-fb3a7319db90@gmail.com> <20180109210722.GS3668920@devbig577.frc2.facebook.com> <672cd179-31be-e03a-f9ff-ce59b76e23e2@gmail.com> <20180110142640.GB3668920@devbig577.frc2.facebook.com> <655118da-6d58-8f02-7367-77c10a3c16ea@gmail.com> <20180110193907.GC3460072@devbig577.frc2.facebook.com> <20180110221418.GF3460072@devbig577.frc2.facebook.com> <5207cfc8-5525-b932-baee-6b0160886178@gmail.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <5207cfc8-5525-b932-baee-6b0160886178@gmail.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.21 (2010-09-15) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Return-Path: Hello, On Wed, Jan 10, 2018 at 11:24:05PM +0100, Michael Kerrisk (man-pages) wrote: > > Oh, I'm probably mixing up two things. > > > > 1. When delegating, cgroup.threads should be delegated. Doing that > > selectively doesn't achieve anything meaningful. > > Understood. But surely delegating cgroup.threads is effectively > meaningless when delegating a "domain" cgroup tree? (Obviously it's > not harmful to delegate the the cgroup.threads file in this case; > it's just not useful to do so.) Yeap, unless we can somehow support non-root mixed domains. Thanks. -- tejun