From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1753863AbZBCXk5 (ORCPT ); Tue, 3 Feb 2009 18:40:57 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1751637AbZBCXks (ORCPT ); Tue, 3 Feb 2009 18:40:48 -0500 Received: from smtp-out.google.com ([216.239.33.17]:53695 "EHLO smtp-out.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751508AbZBCXkr (ORCPT ); Tue, 3 Feb 2009 18:40:47 -0500 DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; s=beta; d=google.com; c=nofws; q=dns; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to: cc:content-type:content-transfer-encoding: x-gmailtapped-by:x-gmailtapped; b=MgguqXE9HyOGtBQLjWxkD78UECUqkGnr5x0208GpR3xBUjsagat580Hpe8UfLPo/2 I89q9Xz7doDz3CeOC/h/g== MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <20090204003847.308cd0df@sbs173> References: <20090202200013.GU3643@vespa.holoscopio.com> <20090202214153.GV3643@vespa.holoscopio.com> <20090203102416.GA8886@redhat.com> <87ljsnzo4v.fsf@benfinney.id.au> <1233671913.8902.53.camel@abacate.horta> <6599ad830902030855h1753f4a4o3a303b4dbddf10de@mail.gmail.com> <20090203184915.GA10004@glandium.org> <20090203185117.GB3359@mini-me.seanius.net> <6599ad830902031114t7de1b570p4ed5ec497e2e150e@mail.gmail.com> <20090204003847.308cd0df@sbs173> Date: Tue, 3 Feb 2009 15:40:39 -0800 Message-ID: <6599ad830902031540ra4e00dejd844d584b0668a6e@mail.gmail.com> Subject: Re: cgroup mount point From: Paul Menage To: Harald Braumann Cc: sean finney , Gustavo Noronha , debian-devel@lists.debian.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-GMailtapped-By: 172.25.146.35 X-GMailtapped: menage Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Tue, Feb 3, 2009 at 3:38 PM, Harald Braumann wrote: > > So, what's the problem with /dev/cgroups then? If shm/ and pts/ > are allowed under /dev, wouldn't it be discriminating against > cgroups/, to not allow it there? Right, that's what I proposed a couple of emails earlier in this thread. Paul