[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20070911044443.GD16222@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
Date: Tue, 11 Sep 2007 10:14:43 +0530
From: Srivatsa Vaddagiri <vatsa@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>
To: "Paul Menage" <menage@...gle.com>
Cc: "Jan Engelhardt" <jengelh@...putergmbh.de>,
containers@...ts.osdl.org, "Ingo Molnar" <mingo@...e.hu>,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, akpm@...ux-foundation.org,
ckrm-tech@...ts.sourceforge.net
Subject: Re: [Devel] Re: [PATCH] Hookup group-scheduler with task container infrastructure
On Mon, Sep 10, 2007 at 11:38:10AM -0700, Paul Menage wrote:
> By definition any container (about to be renamed control group)
> subsystem is some kind of "controller" so that bit seems a bit
> redundant.
>
> Any reason not to just call it "cpu" or "cpu_sched"
Done (in the latest patch I sent a while back)!
--
Regards,
vatsa
-
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