Quoting Christian Seiler (christ...@iwakd.de):
> Hi Serge,
>
> >Ok, how about we make the system-cgroup-dir configurable in
> >/etc/lxc/lxc.conf? So if you have
> >
> > lxc.system-cgroup-dir = /machine
> >
> >then root-created containers will end up in /machine (or, if you're
> >already neste
Hi Serge,
> Ok, how about we make the system-cgroup-dir configurable in
> /etc/lxc/lxc.conf? So if you have
>
> lxc.system-cgroup-dir = /machine
>
> then root-created containers will end up in /machine (or, if you're
> already nested under /lxc/m1, then /lxc/m1/machine). If that is
> unset
Quoting Christian Seiler (christ...@iwakd.de):
> Hi Serge,
>
> >> 1. What about the naming convention? Stick with /lxc/$name or
> >>go with
> >>/machine/$name.lxc (see prev. email)? Or I could make that
> >>configurable?
> >
> >$name.lxc or lxc.$name seems good for all cases. It'll benefi
Hi Serge,
>> 1. What about the naming convention? Stick with /lxc/$name or go
>> with
>> /machine/$name.lxc (see prev. email)? Or I could make that
>> configurable?
>
> $name.lxc or lxc.$name seems good for all cases. It'll benefit
> unprivileged users also. By "/machine/$name.lxc" did
Quoting Christian Seiler (christ...@iwakd.de):
> Hi Serge,
>
> >If we're going to do this, we should do it soon. Would you have time
> >in the next few days?
>
> Define 'few'. ;) I should be able to do that until Monday (barring any
> emergencies).
>
> >(BTW, if we're going to throw words like
Hi Serge,
> If we're going to do this, we should do it soon. Would you have time
> in the next few days?
Define 'few'. ;) I should be able to do that until Monday (barring any
emergencies).
> (BTW, if we're going to throw words like b0rked around, I'd prefer to
> reserve that for the refusal to
Quoting Serge Hallyn (serge.hal...@ubuntu.com):
> Quoting Christian Seiler (christ...@iwakd.de):
> ...
> > If I think about that further, I think the initial bind-mount logic is
> > already borked. Because if nested LXC breaks in such a way, so will
> > many software that uses cgroups and relies on
Quoting Christian Seiler (christ...@iwakd.de):
...
> If I think about that further, I think the initial bind-mount logic is
> already borked. Because if nested LXC breaks in such a way, so will
> many software that uses cgroups and relies on standard behaviour.
>
> I think the correct way for the
Hi Serge,
>> Having /lxc makes it much easier to sett what's part of a container
>> vs
>> what's part of a user session or whatever else uses cgroups these
>> days.
>
> Note that nothing stops you from simply entering cgroup /lxc by hand
> before executing a container. Right now the code simply
Quoting Stéphane Graber (stgra...@ubuntu.com):
> On Mon, Aug 19, 2013 at 04:57:10PM -0500, Serge Hallyn wrote:
> > Quoting Christian Seiler (christ...@iwakd.de):
> > > Hi Serge,
> > >
> > > > Thanks, Christian - I've pushed a new patch to github on top of yours.
> > > > Regular start/stop/lxc-cgro
On Mon, 2013-08-19 at 16:57 -0500, Serge Hallyn wrote:
> Quoting Christian Seiler (christ...@iwakd.de):
> > Hi Serge,
> >
> > > Thanks, Christian - I've pushed a new patch to github on top of yours.
> > > Regular start/stop/lxc-cgroup stuff is working for me both with all
> > > cgroups composed a
Hi Serge,
>> I do have a very stupid question, however: LXC 0.9 used to set the
>> cgroup to /lxc/$name. Now it's just /$name. Is that intentional?
>
> Hm, it was somewhat unconscious but I didn't really mean to do that.
> Some cgroup subsystems do incur a performance penalty for every
> extra di
On Mon, Aug 19, 2013 at 04:57:10PM -0500, Serge Hallyn wrote:
> Quoting Christian Seiler (christ...@iwakd.de):
> > Hi Serge,
> >
> > > Thanks, Christian - I've pushed a new patch to github on top of yours.
> > > Regular start/stop/lxc-cgroup stuff is working for me both with all
> > > cgroups comp
Quoting Christian Seiler (christ...@iwakd.de):
> Hi Serge,
>
> > Thanks, Christian - I've pushed a new patch to github on top of yours.
> > Regular start/stop/lxc-cgroup stuff is working for me both with all
> > cgroups composed and separately mounted.
>
> I can confirm that it works on my setup.
Hi Serge,
> Thanks, Christian - I've pushed a new patch to github on top of yours.
> Regular start/stop/lxc-cgroup stuff is working for me both with all
> cgroups composed and separately mounted.
I can confirm that it works on my setup.
I do have a very stupid question, however: LXC 0.9 used to
Quoting Christian Seiler (christ...@iwakd.de):
> Hi Serge,
>
> > This needs to just be
> >
> > oldlen = newlen;
>
> Oh, yes, that's right, it's the buffer length and not the string length.
> Sorry, I did that late at night and some things got mixed up in my head.
>
> >> @@ -1128,7 +1152,7 @
Hi Serge,
> This needs to just be
>
> oldlen = newlen;
Oh, yes, that's right, it's the buffer length and not the string length.
Sorry, I did that late at night and some things got mixed up in my head.
>> @@ -1128,7 +1152,7 @@ void lxc_cgroup_destroy_desc(struct cgroup_desc
>> *cgroups)
>
Quoting Serge Hallyn (serge.hal...@ubuntu.com):
> Quoting Christian Seiler (christ...@iwakd.de):
> > This fixes some minor bugs in the cgroup logic that made start and
> > attach fail (at least when all cgroup controllers were mounted
> > together).
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Christian Seiler
>
> Tha
Quoting Christian Seiler (christ...@iwakd.de):
> This fixes some minor bugs in the cgroup logic that made start and
> attach fail (at least when all cgroup controllers were mounted
> together).
>
> Signed-off-by: Christian Seiler
Thanks, a few comments.
> ---
> src/lxc/cgroup.c | 31 +++
This fixes some minor bugs in the cgroup logic that made start and
attach fail (at least when all cgroup controllers were mounted
together).
Signed-off-by: Christian Seiler
---
src/lxc/cgroup.c | 31 ---
src/lxc/commands.c |3 ++-
2 files changed, 30 insertion
20 matches
Mail list logo
