From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Mike Galbraith Subject: Re: RFC: documentation of the autogroup feature Date: Wed, 23 Nov 2016 18:11:15 +0100 Message-ID: <1479921075.4306.153.camel@gmx.de> References: <41d802dc-873a-ff02-17ff-93ce50f3e925@gmail.com> <1479901185.4306.38.camel@gmx.de> <327586fa-4672-d070-0ded-850654586273@gmail.com> <1479915229.4306.106.camel@gmx.de> <7513b0a5-c5d0-3a92-5849-995af22601e4@gmail.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: In-Reply-To: <7513b0a5-c5d0-3a92-5849-995af22601e4@gmail.com> Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org To: "Michael Kerrisk (man-pages)" Cc: Peter Zijlstra , Ingo Molnar , linux-man , lkml , Thomas Gleixner List-Id: linux-man@vger.kernel.org On Wed, 2016-11-23 at 17:04 +0100, Michael Kerrisk (man-pages) wrote: > > > In what circumstances does a process get moved back to the root > > > task group? > > > > Userspace actions, tool or human fingers. > > Could you say a little more please. What Kernel-user-space > APIs/system calls/etc. cause this to happen? Well, the system call would be write(), scribbling in the cgroups vfs interface.. not all that helpful without ever more technical detail. > > > Actually, can you define for me what the root task group is, and > > > why it exists? That may be worth some words in this man page. > > > > I don't think we need group scheduling details, there's plenty of > > documentation elsewhere for those who want theory. > > Well, you suggested above > > Perhaps mention that moving a task back to the root task > group will result in the autogroup again taking effect. Dang, evolution doesn't have an unsend button :) -Mike