linux-kernel - Re: [ckrm-tech] [patch00/05]: Containers(V2)- Introduction

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <6599ad830609211507m1f5965d8ucfcb58dd86c97c74@mail.google.com>
Date:	Thu, 21 Sep 2006 15:07:42 -0700
From:	"Paul Menage" <menage@...gle.com>
To:	"Paul Jackson" <pj@....com>
Cc:	sekharan@...ibm.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 9/21/06, Paul Jackson <pj@....com> wrote:
>
> Can the generic container avoid performance bottlenecks due to locks
> or other hot cache lines on the main code paths for fork, exit, page
> allocation and task scheduling?

Page allocation and task scheduling are resource controller issues,
not generic process container issues. The generic process containers
would have essentially the same overheads for fork/exit that cpusets
have currently.

Paul
-
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/