Messages in this thread | | | Date | Mon, 5 Mar 2007 23:17:50 +0530 | From | Srivatsa Vaddagiri <> | Subject | Re: [PATCH 0/2] resource control file system - aka containers on top of nsproxy! |
| |
On Sat, Mar 03, 2007 at 01:22:44PM -0800, Paul Jackson wrote: > I still can't claim to have my head around this, but what you write > here, Herbert, writes here touches on what I suspect is a key > difference between namespaces and resources that would make it > impractical to accomplish both with a shared mechanism for aggregating > tasks.
The way nsproxy is structured, its all pointers to actual namespace (or in case of rcfs patch) resource objects. This lets namespaces objects be in a flat hierarchy while resource objects are in tree-like hierarchy. nsproxy itself doesnt decide any hierarchy. Its those objects pointed to by nsproxy which can form different hierarchies. In fact the rcfs patches allows such a combination afaics.
> > on every limit accounting or check? I think that > > is quite a lot of overhead ... > > Do either of these dereferences require locks?
A rcu_read_lock() should be required, which is not that expensive.
-- Regards, vatsa - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
| |