From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1751021Ab1JKGy0 (ORCPT ); Tue, 11 Oct 2011 02:54:26 -0400 Received: from out01.mta.xmission.com ([166.70.13.231]:46623 "EHLO out01.mta.xmission.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1750712Ab1JKGyZ (ORCPT ); Tue, 11 Oct 2011 02:54:25 -0400 From: ebiederm@xmission.com (Eric W. Biederman) To: Lennart Poettering Cc: Matt Helsley , Kay Sievers , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, harald@redhat.com, david@fubar.dk, greg@kroah.com, Linux Containers , Linux Containers , "Serge E. Hallyn" , Daniel Lezcano , Paul Menage References: <1317943022.1095.25.camel@mop> <20111007074904.GC16723@count0.beaverton.ibm.com> <20111007160113.GB14201@tango.0pointer.de> <20111010163140.GA22191@tango.0pointer.de> <20111010214148.GB26510@tango.0pointer.de> Date: Mon, 10 Oct 2011 23:54:39 -0700 In-Reply-To: <20111010214148.GB26510@tango.0pointer.de> (Lennart Poettering's message of "Mon, 10 Oct 2011 23:41:48 +0200") Message-ID: User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/23.2 (gnu/linux) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-XM-SPF: eid=;;;mid=;;;hst=in02.mta.xmission.com;;;ip=98.207.153.68;;;frm=ebiederm@xmission.com;;;spf=neutral X-XM-AID: U2FsdGVkX1/HMira62DsRl6Sqsg/nSl45KZYvHW/hxU= X-SA-Exim-Connect-IP: 98.207.153.68 X-SA-Exim-Mail-From: ebiederm@xmission.com X-Spam-Report: * -1.0 XM_URI_RBL_RM URI removed in uri.bl.xmission.com * [URIs: freedesktop.org] * 0.0 T_TM2_M_HEADER_IN_MSG BODY: T_TM2_M_HEADER_IN_MSG * -3.0 BAYES_00 BODY: Bayes spam probability is 0 to 1% * [score: 0.0000] * -0.0 DCC_CHECK_NEGATIVE Not listed in DCC * [sa01 1397; Body=1 Fuz1=1 Fuz2=1] * 0.8 RDNS_NONE Delivered to internal network by a host with no rDNS * 0.4 UNTRUSTED_Relay Comes from a non-trusted relay X-Spam-DCC: XMission; sa01 1397; Body=1 Fuz1=1 Fuz2=1 X-Spam-Combo: ;Lennart Poettering X-Spam-Relay-Country: ** Subject: Re: Detecting if you are running in a container X-Spam-Flag: No X-SA-Exim-Version: 4.2.1 (built Fri, 06 Aug 2010 16:31:04 -0600) X-SA-Exim-Scanned: Yes (on in02.mta.xmission.com) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Lennart Poettering writes: > On Mon, 10.10.11 13:59, Eric W. Biederman (ebiederm@xmission.com) wrote: >> My list of things that still have work left to do looks like: >> - cgroups. It is not safe to create a new hierarchies with groups >> that are in existing hierarchies. So cgroups don't work. > > Well, for systemd they actually work quite fine since systemd will > always place its own cgroups below the cgroup it is started in. cgroups > hence make these things nicely stackable. > > In fact, most folks involved in cgroups userspace have agreed to these > rules now: > > http://www.freedesktop.org/wiki/Software/systemd/PaxControlGroups Wow. Are cgroups really that complicated to use? A list of rules a page long on what you have to do to make them useful and non-conflict. Something seems off. Perhaps we need a rule don't mount multiple controllers in the same hierarchy. Eric