[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <46E641C1.8000808@fr.ibm.com>
Date: Tue, 11 Sep 2007 09:20:33 +0200
From: Cedric Le Goater <clg@...ibm.com>
To: Paul Menage <menage@...gle.com>
CC: Dmitry Adamushko <dmitry.adamushko@...il.com>,
vatsa@...ux.vnet.ibm.com,
Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
ckrm-tech@...ts.sourceforge.net, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
containers@...ts.osdl.org,
Jan Engelhardt <jengelh@...putergmbh.de>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] Hookup group-scheduler with task container infrastructure
Paul Menage wrote:
> On 9/10/07, Dmitry Adamushko <dmitry.adamushko@...il.com> wrote:
>> On 10/09/2007, Srivatsa Vaddagiri <vatsa@...ux.vnet.ibm.com> wrote:
>>> On Mon, Sep 10, 2007 at 10:22:59AM -0700, Andrew Morton wrote:
>>>> objection ;) "cpuctlr" isn't memorable. Kernel code is write-rarely,
>>>> read-often. "cpu_controller", please. The extra typing is worth it ;)
>>> Ok! Here's the modified patch (against 2.6.23-rc4-mm1).
>> as everyone seems to be in a quest for a better name... I think, the
>> obvious one would be just 'group_sched'.
>>
>
> But "sched" on its own could refer to CPU scheduling, I/O scheduling,
> network scheduling, ...
>
> And "group" is more or less implied by the fact that it's in the
> containers/control groups filesystem.
"control groups" is the name of your framework. right ?
> So "group_sched" isn't really all that informative. The name should
> definitely contain either "cpu" or "cfs".
"cfs" control group subsystem.
"cfs" looks good enough to identify the subsystem.
C.
-
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