[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <1158774491.7705.32.camel@localhost.localdomain>
Date: Wed, 20 Sep 2006 18:48:11 +0100
From: Alan Cox <alan@...rguk.ukuu.org.uk>
To: Christoph Lameter <clameter@....com>
Cc: Rohit Seth <rohitseth@...gle.com>,
CKRM-Tech <ckrm-tech@...ts.sourceforge.net>, devel@...nvz.org,
pj@....com, npiggin@...e.de,
linux-kernel <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [patch00/05]: Containers(V2)- Introduction
Ar Mer, 2006-09-20 am 10:15 -0700, ysgrifennodd Christoph Lameter:
> The scalability issues can certainly be managed. See the discussions on
> linux-mm.
I'll take a look at a web archive of it, I don't follow -mm.
> Kernel side resource objects? slab pages? Those are tracked.
Slab pages isn't a useful tracking tool for two reasons. The first is
that some resources are genuinely a shared kernel managed pool and
should be treated that way - thats obviously easy to sort out.
The second is that slab pages are not the granularity of allocations so
it becomes possible (and deliberately influencable) to make someone else
allocate the pages all the time so you don't pay the cost. Hence the
beancounters track the real objects.
> Cpusets can share nodes. I am not sure what the problem would be? Paul may
> be able to give you more details.
If it can do it in a human understandable way, configured at runtime
with dynamic sharing, overcommit and reconfiguration of sizes then
great. Lets see what Paul has to say.
Alan
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists