Re: [RFC] [PATCH] Re: Prefixing cgroup generic control filenames with "cgroup."

["Paul Menage" <menage@google.com>]

On Thu, Feb 28, 2008 at 10:20 PM, Paul Jackson <pj@sgi.com> wrote:
>
>  For example, what would have been cgroup:
>
>         /mnt/cgroup/user_created_groupname1/user_created_groupname2
>
>  now becomes:
>
>         /mnt/cgroup/cgroups/user_created_groupname1/cgroups/user_created_groupname2
>
>  Right?

Well, the additional components are called "groups" not "cgroups", but
basically yes.

>
>  You're doing this just to "protect the user from themself", to make
>  it more difficult for them to rely on some name that in a future
>  version is no longer available.

Correct. "Future-proofing" and "Forward planning" are two
alternatively-nuanced ways of describing this ...

>
>  There is really a trivial resolution to this ... stake out what
>  additional kernel generated names might ever be added ... some
>  pattern(s) of characters which all future names will match, which
>  leave wide swaths of names safely available, in perpetuity, for
>  user created names, with no risk of future collision.

Yes, we could just say "the kernel reserves the right to use any names
that begin with a lower-case letter, and no others", and be done with
it. That leaves a bit of an ugly taste in my mouth, but if people seem
to prefer that approach we can go for it.

>
>  And did I say incompatible with released versions?

Not at all incompatible if it requires a mount option to enable it ...

Paul