[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <m1649cbq6n.fsf@ebiederm.dsl.xmission.com>
Date: Wed, 07 Mar 2007 16:16:00 -0700
From: ebiederm@...ssion.com (Eric W. Biederman)
To: "Paul Menage" <menage@...gle.com>
Cc: "Serge E. Hallyn" <serue@...ibm.com>,
"Srivatsa Vaddagiri" <vatsa@...ibm.com>, sam@...ain.net,
akpm@...ux-foundation.org, pj@....com, dev@...ru, xemul@...ru,
containers@...ts.osdl.org, winget@...gle.com,
ckrm-tech@...ts.sourceforge.net, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/2] resource control file system - aka containers on top of nsproxy!
"Paul Menage" <menage@...gle.com> writes:
> No, Sam was saying that nsproxy should be the object that all resource
> controllers hook off.
I think implementation wise this tends to make sense.
However it should have nothing to do with semantics.
If we have a lot of independent resource controllers. Placing the
pointer to their data structures directly in nsproxy instead of in
task_struct sounds like a reasonable idea but it should not be user
visible.
Eric
-
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