Re: PIDs Controller Limit

[Aleksa Sarai]

> On Thu, Sep 24, 2015 at 09:42:38AM +1000, Aleksa Sarai wrote:
>> Does it make sense for the PIDs controller to allow a user to set a
>> limit of 0? Since we don't cancel attaches, a limit of 0 doesn't
>> affect anything (nothing stops attaches, and you need to have a
>> process in the PIDs cgroup in order for fork()s to be affected by the
>> limit). So I think that attempting to set pid.limit to 0 should return
>> an -EINVAL.
>
> I don't know.  Why does it matter?

Well, it might be confusing that a limit of `0` is not different from
a limit of `1`. Especially since someone might think that a limit of
`0` means "no processes AT ALL", which is wrong. Although, I guess
they should've just RTFM'd in that case.

-- 
Aleksa Sarai (cyphar)
www.cyphar.com
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/