linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 6/7] containers (V7): BeanCounters over generic process containers

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]

Date:	Tue, 13 Feb 2007 01:37:27 -0800
From:	"Paul Menage" <menage@...gle.com>
To:	"Pavel Emelianov" <xemul@...ru>
Cc:	akpm@...l.org, pj@....com, sekharan@...ibm.com, dev@...ru,
	serue@...ibm.com, vatsa@...ibm.com, ebiederm@...ssion.com,
	ckrm-tech@...ts.sourceforge.net, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	rohitseth@...gle.com, mbligh@...gle.com, winget@...gle.com,
	containers@...ts.osdl.org, devel@...nvz.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 6/7] containers (V7): BeanCounters over generic process containers

On 2/13/07, Pavel Emelianov <xemul@...ru> wrote:
>
> I have implementation that moves arbitrary task :)

Is that the one that calls stop_machine() in order to move a task
around? That seemed a little heavyweight ...

> May be we can do context (container-on-task) handling lockless?

What did you have in mind?

> > I thought that we solved that problem by having a tmp_bc field in the
> > task_struct that would take precedence over the main bc if it was
> > non-null?
>
> Of course, but I'm commenting this patchset which doesn't have
> this facility.

OK, I can add the concept in to the example too.

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/