On Thu, Apr 3, 2008 at 2:03 PM, <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > * "freezer.kill" > > writing <n> will send signal number <n> to all tasks >
My first thought (not having looked at the code yet) is that sending a signal doesn't really have anything to do with freezing, so it shouldn't be in the same subsystem. Maybe a separate subsystem called "signal"? And more than that, it's not something that requires any particular per-process state, so there's no reason that the subsystem that provides the "kill" functionality shouldn't be able to be mounted in multiple hierarchies. How about if I added support for stateless subsystems, that could potentially be mounted in multiple hierarchies at once? They wouldn't need an entry in the css set, since they have no state. > * Usage : > > # mkdir /containers/freezer > # mount -t container -ofreezer freezer /containers/freezer > # mkdir /containers/freezer/0 > # echo $some_pid > /containers/freezer/0/tasks > > to get status of the freezer subsystem : > > # cat /containers/freezer/0/freezer.freeze > RUNNING > > to freeze all tasks in the container : > > # echo 1 > /containers/freezer/0/freezer.freeze > # cat /containers/freezer/0/freezer.freeze > FREEZING > # cat /containers/freezer/0/freezer.freeze > FROZEN Could we separate this out into two files? One called "freeze" that's a 0/1 for whether we're intending to freeze the subsystem, and one called "frozen" that indicates whether it is frozen? And maybe a "state" file to report the RUNNING/FREEZING/FROZEN distinction in a human-readable way? Paul _______________________________________________ Containers mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] https://lists.linux-foundation.org/mailman/listinfo/containers _______________________________________________ Devel mailing list Devel@openvz.org https://openvz.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
