Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1753540AbZGBN1S (ORCPT ); Thu, 2 Jul 2009 09:27:18 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1752440AbZGBN1L (ORCPT ); Thu, 2 Jul 2009 09:27:11 -0400 Received: from e34.co.us.ibm.com ([32.97.110.152]:36471 "EHLO e34.co.us.ibm.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751544AbZGBN1K (ORCPT ); Thu, 2 Jul 2009 09:27:10 -0400 Date: Thu, 2 Jul 2009 08:26:59 -0500 From: "Serge E. Hallyn" To: Li Zefan Cc: Paul Menage , Andrew Morton , LKML , Linux Containers Subject: Re: [PATCH][BUGFIX] cgroups: fix pid namespace bug Message-ID: <20090702132659.GA8051@us.ibm.com> References: <4A4C0C60.4050106@cn.fujitsu.com> <6599ad830907011836x5eccc83eyc896a67295a6486d@mail.gmail.com> <4A4C18D5.7020806@cn.fujitsu.com> <6599ad830907011920r44df4022p53808b574da4a886@mail.gmail.com> <4A4C1B33.2030002@cn.fujitsu.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <4A4C1B33.2030002@cn.fujitsu.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.18 (2008-05-17) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 1367 Lines: 33 Quoting Li Zefan (lizf@cn.fujitsu.com): > Paul Menage wrote: > > On Wed, Jul 1, 2009 at 7:17 PM, Li Zefan 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 -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/