On Tue, Oct 21, 2014 at 09:16:16PM +0200, Lennart Poettering wrote: > On Fri, 19.09.14 17:14, Michal Sekletar (msekl...@redhat.com) wrote: > <snip> > I do see the usecase though for those projects. I'd probably suggest > not to merge it for RHEL either. But instead I'd propose a different > solution for software: make sure sure to always move a PID into a > cgroup as soon as it is created, so that its removal is blocked. Or in > other words: right before you need a cgroup to add yourself to it, > create it, and expect that it might go away while you are not using > it. To deal with the possible race condition of creating a cgroup > which is immediately cleaned up by somebody else, try doing this in a > loop, until you succeeded.
I think I grok what are you proposing, however according to developments in https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1139223 it doesn't seem to be correct solution either. systemd will happily remove cgroup in which there are processes. > > That way things can always stay nicely cleaned up and things are > robust towards other processing playing around in the cgroup tree. I am not sure how can we make that possible (playing nicely in cgroup tree) for the time beeing until we are the only writer. > > Hope that makes sense? > > Lennart Michal > > -- > Lennart Poettering, Red Hat _______________________________________________ systemd-devel mailing list systemd-devel@lists.freedesktop.org http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/systemd-devel