| 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
| ||
|
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/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists