From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Paul Menage Subject: Re: [PATCH v8 0/3] cgroups: implement moving a threadgroup's threads atomically with cgroup.procs Date: Sun, 13 Feb 2011 22:12:51 -0800 Message-ID: References: <20101226120919.GA28529@ghc17.ghc.andrew.cmu.edu> <20110208013542.GC31569@ghc17.ghc.andrew.cmu.edu> <20110209151046.89e03dcd.akpm@linux-foundation.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Return-path: In-Reply-To: <20110209151046.89e03dcd.akpm-de/tnXTf+JLsfHDXvbKv3WD2FQJk+8+b@public.gmane.org> List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Sender: containers-bounces-cunTk1MwBs9QetFLy7KEm3xJsTq8ys+cHZ5vskTnxNA@public.gmane.org Errors-To: containers-bounces-cunTk1MwBs9QetFLy7KEm3xJsTq8ys+cHZ5vskTnxNA@public.gmane.org To: Andrew Morton Cc: Ben Blum , containers-cunTk1MwBs9QetFLy7KEm3xJsTq8ys+cHZ5vskTnxNA@public.gmane.org, linux-kernel-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org, oleg-H+wXaHxf7aLQT0dZR+AlfA@public.gmane.org, Miao Xie , David Rientjes , ebiederm-aS9lmoZGLiVWk0Htik3J/w@public.gmane.org List-Id: containers.vger.kernel.org On Wed, Feb 9, 2011 at 3:10 PM, Andrew Morton w= rote: > On Mon, 7 Feb 2011 20:35:42 -0500 > Ben Blum wrote: > >> On Sun, Dec 26, 2010 at 07:09:19AM -0500, Ben Blum wrote: >> > On Fri, Dec 24, 2010 at 03:22:26AM -0500, Ben Blum wrote: >> > > On Wed, Aug 11, 2010 at 01:46:04AM -0400, Ben Blum wrote: >> > > > On Fri, Jul 30, 2010 at 07:56:49PM -0400, Ben Blum wrote: >> > > > > This patch series is a revision of http://lkml.org/lkml/2010/6/2= 5/11 . >> > > > > >> > > > > This patch series implements a write function for the 'cgroup.pr= ocs' >> > > > > per-cgroup file, which enables atomic movement of multithreaded >> > > > > applications between cgroups. Writing the thread-ID of any threa= d in a >> > > > > threadgroup to a cgroup's procs file causes all threads in the g= roup to >> > > > > be moved to that cgroup safely with respect to threads forking/e= xiting. >> > > > > (Possible usage scenario: If running a multithreaded build syste= m that >> > > > > sucks up system resources, this lets you restrict it all at once= into a >> > > > > new cgroup to keep it under control.) >> > > > > > > The above six month old text is the best (and almost the only) > explanation of the rationale for the entire patch series. =A0Is > it still correct and complete? > It's still correct, but I'm sure we could come up with a more detailed justification if necessary. Paul