Hello, John. On Thu, Dec 08, 2016 at 09:39:38PM -0800, John Stultz wrote: > So just to clarify the discussion for my purposes and make sure I > understood, per-cgroup CAP rules was not desired, and instead we > should either utilize an existing cap (are there still objections to > CAP_SYS_RESOURCE? - this isn't clear to me) or create a new one (ie, > bring back the older CAP_CGROUP_MIGRATE patch).
Let's create a new one. It looks to be a bit too different to share with an existing one. > Tejun: Do you have a more finished version of your patch that I should > add my changes on top of? Oh, just submit the patch on top of the current for-next. I can queue mine on top of yours. They are mostly orthogonal. Thanks. -- tejun
