From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Tejun Heo Subject: Re: [Suggestion] kernel: cgroup: mount failure in LTP cgroup_regression_test.sh Date: Thu, 21 Nov 2013 10:26:45 -0500 Message-ID: <20131121152645.GB3352@htj.dyndns.org> References: <527C9D9B.8090802@asianux.com> <20131120173549.GO28946@htj.dyndns.org> <528D6E19.4080100@gmail.com> <528D89AA.6080102@gmail.com> <551116969.38084288.1385021094494.JavaMail.root@redhat.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Return-path: DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=sender:date:from:to:cc:subject:message-id:references:mime-version :content-type:content-disposition:in-reply-to:user-agent; bh=TdAWAngU/TxbDR1FjQGknXnI4B01uwI4EDE5CMpeD5s=; b=rTLVwi7FOdRhphRqo7i56wogrjbPaPfsecyXhV8SMNaU7LOIe3YCnkJ2D0vBXWWmhA V8bGgdH090LgnxCdJeRwvF8vogN6ftOzyhkhc3wztSn4w5hWtwDIYz+XwTnU/QrMDv8I zjE2tR5ozMCpL7d8y9CaFi0SYEfNeXeM45A4+TN1I4Zregc4PhC+oOGm+o4SPz32kMuj mWnTit4qOoJyiwmqbjJW22TjPl/1K/AFw7bDl7lzUgW+Sm7FH30V1eHREPPLTrDT+34f /mTcfK3YO0sDV/wSNBUgGKBEbbEwN3P36jml0uMEhZfQCJrh38Hcaq7yyabeliQgssWC gZsw== Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <551116969.38084288.1385021094494.JavaMail.root-H+wXaHxf7aLQT0dZR+AlfA@public.gmane.org> Sender: cgroups-owner-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org List-ID: Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit To: Jan Stancek Cc: Chen Gang , Garrett Cooper , gaowanlong-BthXqXjhjHXQFUHtdCDX3A@public.gmane.org, chris-8NJIiSa5LzA@public.gmane.org, mitani-Czb31pHLG9l3+QwDJ9on6Q@public.gmane.org, lizf-BthXqXjhjHXQFUHtdCDX3A@public.gmane.org, Li Zefan , containers-cunTk1MwBs9QetFLy7KEm3xJsTq8ys+cHZ5vskTnxNA@public.gmane.org, cgroups-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org Hello, Jan. On Thu, Nov 21, 2013 at 03:04:54AM -0500, Jan Stancek wrote: > it looks like those 2 subsystems are already mounted by systemd, > each in different hierarchy: > > > cpuacct 4 35 1 > > freezer 5 4 1 > > from Documentation/cgroups/cgroups.txt: > "If an active hierarchy with exactly the same set of subsystems already > exists, it will be reused for the new mount. If no existing hierarchy > matches, and any of the requested subsystems are in use in an existing > hierarchy, the mount will fail with -EBUSY. Otherwise, a new hierarchy > is activated, associated with the requested subsystems." Ah, cgroup now requires that those recycled mounts to have matching options. This is an intended behavior change because previously we could end up with mounts which have actual options which differ from what was specified by mount, which can be misleading at the very least. Would it be possible to update LTP accordingly? Thanks. -- tejun