[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <1158799800.6536.122.camel@linuxchandra>
Date: Wed, 20 Sep 2006 17:50:00 -0700
From: Chandra Seetharaman <sekharan@...ibm.com>
To: Paul Jackson <pj@....com>
Cc: menage@...gle.com, npiggin@...e.de,
ckrm-tech@...ts.sourceforge.net, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
rohitseth@...gle.com, devel@...nvz.org, clameter@....com
Subject: Re: [ckrm-tech] [patch00/05]: Containers(V2)- Introduction
On Wed, 2006-09-20 at 17:33 -0700, Paul Jackson wrote:
> Chandra wrote:
> > What I am wondering is that whether the tight coupling of rg and cpuset
> > (into a container data structure) is ok.
>
> Just guessing wildly here, but I'd anticipate that at best we
> (resource groups and cpusets) would share container mechanisms,
> but not share the same container instances.
That is what my thinking too.
>
--
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Chandra Seetharaman | Be careful what you choose....
- sekharan@...ibm.com | .......you may get it.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
-
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