linux-kernel - Re: containers (was Re: -mm merge plans for 2.6.23)

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: <20070711041007.10ad759c.pj@sgi.com>
Date:	Wed, 11 Jul 2007 04:10:07 -0700
From:	Paul Jackson <pj@....com>
To:	vatsa@...ux.vnet.ibm.com
Cc:	mingo@...e.hu, akpm@...ux-foundation.org, menage@...gle.com,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, containers@...ts.osdl.org
Subject: Re: containers (was Re: -mm merge plans for 2.6.23)

Srivatsa wrote:
> So Ingo was proposing we use cpuset as that user interface to manage
> task-groups. This will be only for 2.6.23.

Good explanation - thanks.

In short, the proposal was to use the task partition defined by cpusets
to define CFS task-groups, until the real process containers are
available.

Or, I see in the next message, Ingo responding favorably to your
alternative, using task uid's to partition the tasks into CFS
task-groups.

Yeah, Ingo's preference for using uid's (or gid's ??) sounds right to
me - a sustainable API.

Wouldn't want to be adding a cpuset API for a single 2.6.N release.

... gid's -- why not?

-- 
                  I won't rest till it's the best ...
                  Programmer, Linux Scalability
                  Paul Jackson <pj@....com> 1.925.600.0401
-
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/