[PATCH 2/5] sched: new clone flag CLONE_NEWCGROUP for cgroup namespace
Serge Hallyn
serge.hallyn at ubuntu.com
Thu Jul 24 17:01:19 UTC 2014
Quoting Aditya Kali (adityakali at google.com):
> CLONE_NEWCGROUP will be used to create new cgroup namespace.
>
This is fine and I'm not looking to bikeshed, but am wondering - did
you consider any other ways beside unshare (i.e. a new mount option
to cgroupfs)? If so, do you have a list of the downsides of those?
(I mainly ask bc clone flags are still a scarce commodity)
> Signed-off-by: Aditya Kali <adityakali at google.com>
Acked-by: Serge E. Hallyn <serge.hallyn at ubuntu.com>
> ---
> include/uapi/linux/sched.h | 3 +--
> 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 2 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/include/uapi/linux/sched.h b/include/uapi/linux/sched.h
> index 34f9d73..2f90d00 100644
> --- a/include/uapi/linux/sched.h
> +++ b/include/uapi/linux/sched.h
> @@ -21,8 +21,7 @@
> #define CLONE_DETACHED 0x00400000 /* Unused, ignored */
> #define CLONE_UNTRACED 0x00800000 /* set if the tracing process can't force CLONE_PTRACE on this clone */
> #define CLONE_CHILD_SETTID 0x01000000 /* set the TID in the child */
> -/* 0x02000000 was previously the unused CLONE_STOPPED (Start in stopped state)
> - and is now available for re-use. */
> +#define CLONE_NEWCGROUP 0x02000000 /* New cgroup namespace */
> #define CLONE_NEWUTS 0x04000000 /* New utsname group? */
> #define CLONE_NEWIPC 0x08000000 /* New ipcs */
> #define CLONE_NEWUSER 0x10000000 /* New user namespace */
> --
> 2.0.0.526.g5318336
>
> _______________________________________________
> Containers mailing list
> Containers at lists.linux-foundation.org
> https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/containers
More information about the Containers
mailing list