From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: "Michael Kerrisk (man-pages)" Subject: Re: cgroups(7): documenting cgroups v2 delegation Date: Wed, 10 Jan 2018 23:24:05 +0100 Message-ID: <5207cfc8-5525-b932-baee-6b0160886178@gmail.com> References: <1ce0a885-94fb-7480-7180-7b873c95b1bb@gmail.com> <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> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=cc:subject:to:references:from:message-id:date:user-agent :mime-version:in-reply-to:content-language:content-transfer-encoding; bh=eLmgPt2e+pPpL+FVuzRynfMiJN644WrKV6Io51wBgi8=; b=Gz8jWQD5+HXWJcEsNe8A3k7Hg4rSHaebdNbevGPYEVHrGWA5nvZs1POmG/RojvZ81m iIl3xUeTIHo5KmGtnJu/hA/U2Jo0pvKGGUUp8B54jur00LlQ/HEZ4NUjlU8j265h28S3 SnFWptzFm6A5nV/1Wyem/0S04oJGEkikz1MGAxtKcaBzDI6woHltXhWiWIBpKKyssP1g CpG+KCPQyzhA/CfCEuOh7NZQwE3ByO2bcPPpY89HQvCiCU7hVU26Ma/nOXwSnJ/7HSIA Cw7JUwByRPYzEpw7ba0C8leaq1rnxZy6rT91B/XszCQlYXug9egG6E0b8oZahuUUbDx2 FoTg== In-Reply-To: <20180110221418.GF3460072-4dN5La/x3IkLX0oZNxdnEQ2O0Ztt9esIQQ4Iyu8u01E@public.gmane.org> Content-Language: en-US Sender: cgroups-owner-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org List-ID: Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" To: Tejun Heo Cc: mtk.manpages-Re5JQEeQqe8AvxtiuMwx3w@public.gmane.org, "Serge E. Hallyn" , linux-man , lkml , cgroups-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org, Roman Gushchin Hello Tejun, On 01/10/2018 11:14 PM, Tejun Heo wrote: > Hello, Michael. > > On Wed, Jan 10, 2018 at 11:01:11PM +0100, Michael Kerrisk (man-pages) wrote: >>>>>> Can you please confirm that it's only necessary to delegate this file >>>>>> if we are delegating a threaded subtree? >>>>> >>>>> Replied on the other thread. The file isn't delegatable as far as I >>>>> can tell. >>>> >>>> So, following on from the discussion in the other thread, my >>>> question above still stands. >>> >>> Oh, I frankly haven't thought about delegating a threaded subtree. >> >> I'm still confused. cgroup-v2.txt documents the possibility. You >> wrote that text. We just had a conversation in another thread about the >> fact that cgroup.threads is delegatable. You must have thought at >> least a little about this? > > 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.) > 2. I haven't thought much about delegating a sub-protion of a threaded > subtree. Everything works the same way. I just can't think of a > use case. Ahhh -- now I see what you meant before. Cheers, Michael -- Michael Kerrisk Linux man-pages maintainer; http://www.kernel.org/doc/man-pages/ Linux/UNIX System Programming Training: http://man7.org/training/