Re: [PATCH -mm] remove node_ prefix_from ns subsystem

[Cedric Le Goater <clg@fr.ibm.com>]

Andrew Morton wrote:
> On Thu, 22 May 2008 01:23:35 -0700 "Paul Menage" <menage@google.com> wrote:
> 
>> Hi Andrew,
>>
>> On Thu, May 22, 2008 at 1:10 AM, Andrew Morton
>> <akpm@linux-foundation.org> wrote:
>>> What the change is, why it is being made, what the user-visible
>>> presentation is, what the impact upon users is, why we think it won't
>>> be a problem, etc?  The stuff which should have been right there from
>>> day one, before the code change was even made?
>> The change is that previously when cgroup_clone() was called
>> (currently only from the unshare path in ns_proxy cgroup, you'd get a
>> new group named "node_$pid" whereas now you'll get a group named after
>> just your pid.)
>>
>> The only users who would notice it are those who are using the
>> ns_proxy cgroup subsystem to auto-create cgroups when namespaces are
>> unshared - something of an experimental feature, which I think really
>> needs more complete container/namespace support in order to be useful.
>> I suspect the only users are Cedric and Serge, or maybe a few others
>> on containers@lists.linux-foundation.org. And in fact it would only be
>> noticed by the users who make the assumption about how the name is
>> generated, rather than getting it from the /proc/<pid>/cgroups file
>> for the process in question.
>>
>> Whether the change is actually needed or not I'm fairly agnostic on,
>> but I guess it is more elegant to just use the pid as the new group
>> name rather than adding a fairly arbitrary "node_" prefix on the
>> front.

Thanks Paul.

> Well I suppose that as a non-back-compatible change we should feed it
> into 2.6.25.x as well.  It's a bit unusual, but so doing will reduce the
> number of hey-where-did-my-file-go discoveries.

Thanks andrew. I have being keeping that patch for so long that I didn't
realize that the ns cgroup subsystem had been already merged. sorry for 
the noise.

C.