From: Nikolay Borisov <kernel-6AxghH7DbtA@public.gmane.org>
To: Aleksa Sarai <cyphar-gVpy/LI/lHzQT0dZR+AlfA@public.gmane.org>,
Tejun Heo <tj-DgEjT+Ai2ygdnm+yROfE0A@public.gmane.org>
Cc: linux-kernel-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org,
cgroups-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org
Subject: Re: PIDs Controller Limit
Date: Tue, 29 Sep 2015 09:13:34 +0300 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <560A2C0E.40007@kyup.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CAOviyagSDkNWY1X7d=nAhgqkOz2fE+ck+rS9Fn_hfMbCZHRyKw-JsoAwUIsXosN+BqQ9rBEUg@public.gmane.org>
On 09/26/2015 02:11 AM, Aleksa Sarai wrote:
>> On Thu, Sep 24, 2015 at 09:42:38AM +1000, Aleksa Sarai wrote:
>>> Does it make sense for the PIDs controller to allow a user to set a
>>> limit of 0? Since we don't cancel attaches, a limit of 0 doesn't
>>> affect anything (nothing stops attaches, and you need to have a
>>> process in the PIDs cgroup in order for fork()s to be affected by the
>>> limit). So I think that attempting to set pid.limit to 0 should return
>>> an -EINVAL.
>>
>> I don't know. Why does it matter?
>
> Well, it might be confusing that a limit of `0` is not different from
> a limit of `1`. Especially since someone might think that a limit of
> `0` means "no processes AT ALL", which is wrong. Although, I guess
> they should've just RTFM'd in that case.
I personally would have parsed a value of 0 as "unlimited"
WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Nikolay Borisov <kernel@kyup.com>
To: Aleksa Sarai <cyphar@cyphar.com>, Tejun Heo <tj@kernel.org>
Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, cgroups@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: PIDs Controller Limit
Date: Tue, 29 Sep 2015 09:13:34 +0300 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <560A2C0E.40007@kyup.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CAOviyagSDkNWY1X7d=nAhgqkOz2fE+ck+rS9Fn_hfMbCZHRyKw@mail.gmail.com>
On 09/26/2015 02:11 AM, Aleksa Sarai wrote:
>> On Thu, Sep 24, 2015 at 09:42:38AM +1000, Aleksa Sarai wrote:
>>> Does it make sense for the PIDs controller to allow a user to set a
>>> limit of 0? Since we don't cancel attaches, a limit of 0 doesn't
>>> affect anything (nothing stops attaches, and you need to have a
>>> process in the PIDs cgroup in order for fork()s to be affected by the
>>> limit). So I think that attempting to set pid.limit to 0 should return
>>> an -EINVAL.
>>
>> I don't know. Why does it matter?
>
> Well, it might be confusing that a limit of `0` is not different from
> a limit of `1`. Especially since someone might think that a limit of
> `0` means "no processes AT ALL", which is wrong. Although, I guess
> they should've just RTFM'd in that case.
I personally would have parsed a value of 0 as "unlimited"
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2015-09-29 6:13 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 8+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2015-09-23 23:42 PIDs Controller Limit Aleksa Sarai
[not found] ` <CAOviyajLPivBQLauYHWTW71PHyvF15X=Ocu8JDc-92s0k3XRwA-JsoAwUIsXosN+BqQ9rBEUg@public.gmane.org>
2015-09-25 15:39 ` Tejun Heo
2015-09-25 15:39 ` Tejun Heo
2015-09-25 23:11 ` Aleksa Sarai
[not found] ` <CAOviyagSDkNWY1X7d=nAhgqkOz2fE+ck+rS9Fn_hfMbCZHRyKw-JsoAwUIsXosN+BqQ9rBEUg@public.gmane.org>
2015-09-28 15:51 ` Tejun Heo
2015-09-28 15:51 ` Tejun Heo
2015-09-29 6:13 ` Nikolay Borisov [this message]
2015-09-29 6:13 ` Nikolay Borisov
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=560A2C0E.40007@kyup.com \
--to=kernel-6axghh7dbta@public.gmane.org \
--cc=cgroups-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org \
--cc=cyphar-gVpy/LI/lHzQT0dZR+AlfA@public.gmane.org \
--cc=linux-kernel-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org \
--cc=tj-DgEjT+Ai2ygdnm+yROfE0A@public.gmane.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.