From owner-freebsd-jail@FreeBSD.ORG Mon Dec 7 19:40:57 2009 Return-Path: Delivered-To: jail@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id EB8021065670 for ; Mon, 7 Dec 2009 19:40:57 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from 000.fbsd@quip.cz) Received: from elsa.codelab.cz (elsa.codelab.cz [94.124.105.4]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id A6EBC8FC27 for ; Mon, 7 Dec 2009 19:40:57 +0000 (UTC) Received: from localhost (localhost.codelab.cz [127.0.0.1]) by elsa.codelab.cz (Postfix) with ESMTP id 373E919E023; Mon, 7 Dec 2009 20:40:56 +0100 (CET) Received: from [192.168.1.2] (r5bb235.net.upc.cz [86.49.61.235]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by elsa.codelab.cz (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id CB9DE19E019; Mon, 7 Dec 2009 20:40:53 +0100 (CET) Message-ID: <4B1D5A45.1010301@quip.cz> Date: Mon, 07 Dec 2009 20:40:53 +0100 From: Miroslav Lachman <000.fbsd@quip.cz> User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.0; en-US; rv:1.9.1.4) Gecko/20091017 SeaMonkey/2.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: "Bjoern A. Zeeb" References: <2ec071a80912070104i6a7a38e3labc33ee3b494cef5@mail.gmail.com> <20091207122256.45984m6btgeeugmc@webmail.leidinger.net> <4B1CF4B3.8020708@quip.cz> <20091207182241.I83957@maildrop.int.zabbadoz.net> In-Reply-To: <20091207182241.I83957@maildrop.int.zabbadoz.net> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: jail@freebsd.org Subject: Re: ezjail with vimage X-BeenThere: freebsd-jail@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: "Discussion about FreeBSD jail\(8\)" List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 07 Dec 2009 19:40:58 -0000 Bjoern A. Zeeb wrote: > On Mon, 7 Dec 2009, Miroslav Lachman wrote: > > Hi Miroslav, > >> The last time I wrote with Bjoern A. Zeeb about jailname, cpuset etc. >> support in rc.conf (back in March 2009) he stated that "there is no >> need to add anything" because it can be done by jail_NAME_flags. >> AFAIK current system still doesn't allow me to set cpuset to jail from >> rc.conf > > Check /etc/defaults/rc.conf for jail_example_exec_afterstart. You already said that in the past and it was the reason why I found bug in cpuset. http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-jail/2009-April/000830.html As I said, exec_afterstart is executed inside the jail and it means that I can not use it to bind the jail to specific CPU cores. ...but maybe I am blind. Can you correct me if I am wrong? From my point of view, it can be done in rc.subr as more general way allowing to use cpuset for "any" process started by rc.subr similar to what is proposed in this patch for setfib http://www.kes.net.ua/softdev/fib_patch.html Miroslav Lachman