[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <6599ad830706080855n22612814u4805d34a295b165f@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Fri, 8 Jun 2007 08:55:47 -0700
From: "Paul Menage" <menage@...gle.com>
To: "Serge E. Hallyn" <serge@...lyn.com>
Cc: "Paul Jackson" <pj@....com>, "Serge E. Hallyn" <serue@...ibm.com>,
vatsa@...ibm.com, ckrm-tech@...ts.sourceforge.net,
balbir@...ibm.com, rohitseth@...gle.com, haveblue@...ibm.com,
xemul@...ru, dev@...ru, containers@...ts.osdl.org,
devel@...nvz.org, ebiederm@...ssion.com, mbligh@...gle.com,
cpw@....com, svaidy@...ux.vnet.ibm.com, akpm@...ux-foundation.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [ckrm-tech] [PATCH 00/10] Containers(V10): Generic Process Containers
On 6/8/07, Serge E. Hallyn <serge@...lyn.com> wrote:
>
> Anyway the patch I sent is simple enough, and if users end up demanding
> the ability to better deal with exclusive cpusets, the patch will be
> simple enough to extend by changing cpuset_auto_setup(), so let's
> stick with that patch since it's your preference (IIUC).
>
Sounds good to me, although I think my preference would be to extend
the "create()" subsystem callback with a "struct task_struct
*clone_task" parameter that indicates that clone_task is cloning its
own container; a subsystem like cpusets that needs to do additional
setup at that point could inherit settings either from the parent or
from clone_task's container (or something else) as desired. (It could
also do permission checking based on properties of clone_task, etc).
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