On Fri, Aug 12, 2016 at 09:21:39AM -0400, Tejun Heo wrote: > On Thu, Aug 11, 2016 at 09:50:48PM -0700, Sargun Dhillon wrote: > > I realize that in_cgroup is more consistent, but under_cgroup makes > > far more sense to me. I think it's more intuitive. > > So, I think in_cgroup should mean that the object is in that > particular cgroup while under_cgroup in the subhierarchy of that > cgroup. Let's rename the other subhierarchy test to under too. I > think that'd be a lot less confusing going forward.
Ah, I suppose the bpf part is userland visible? If so, there isn't much we can do and probably best to stick with in_cgroup for that part. Bummer but no big deal. Thanks. -- tejun
