From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Vivek Goyal Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/2] net: Implement SO_PASSCGROUP to enable passing cgroup path Date: Thu, 17 Apr 2014 15:16:47 -0400 Message-ID: <20140417191646.GA2461@redhat.com> References: <1397753323.2628.60.camel@willson.li.ssimo.org> <20140417171256.GB25334@redhat.com> <1397756025.2628.64.camel@willson.li.ssimo.org> <1397759013.2628.86.camel@willson.li.ssimo.org> <20140417185023.GA32527@redhat.com> <1397761817.2628.113.camel@willson.li.ssimo.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Cc: Andy Lutomirski , Daniel J Walsh , David Miller , Tejun Heo , "linux-kernel-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org" , lpoetter-H+wXaHxf7aLQT0dZR+AlfA@public.gmane.org, cgroups-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org, kay-H+wXaHxf7aLQT0dZR+AlfA@public.gmane.org, Network Development To: Simo Sorce Return-path: Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <1397761817.2628.113.camel-Hs+ccMQdwurzDu64bZtGtWD2FQJk+8+b@public.gmane.org> Sender: cgroups-owner-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org List-Id: netdev.vger.kernel.org On Thu, Apr 17, 2014 at 03:10:17PM -0400, Simo Sorce wrote: [..] > At this point I think journald people need to give a little bit more > details on how they plan to use SO_PASSCGROUP. > > For my use cases I care only about streams and SO_PEERCGROUP that does > not have any of the (perceived) issues of SO_PASSCGROUP. Ok, so we agree that SO_PEERCGROUP is not a problem. And it solves the problem for some of the use cases. And there is lot of contention on the SO_PASSCGROUP option. So how about taking one step at a time. Get SO_PEERCGROUP in first and then get into more details on how SO_PASSCGROUP will exactly be used and then decide what to do. Thanks Vivek