Messages in this thread | | | Date | Wed, 7 Mar 2007 09:46:35 -0800 | From | "Paul Menage" <> | Subject | Re: [PATCH 0/2] resource control file system - aka containers on top of nsproxy! |
| |
On 3/7/07, Serge E. Hallyn <serue@us.ibm.com> wrote: > Quoting Srivatsa Vaddagiri (vatsa@in.ibm.com): > > On Tue, Mar 06, 2007 at 06:32:07PM -0800, Paul Menage wrote: > > > I'm not really sure that I see the value of having this be part of > > > nsproxy rather than the previous independent container (and > > > container_group) structure. > > > > *shrug* > > > > I wrote the patch mainly to see whether the stuff container folks (Sam Vilain > > et al) were complaining abt (that container structure abstraction > > inside the kernel is redundant/unnecessary) made sense or not. > > I still think the complaint was about terminology, not implementation.
No, Sam was saying that nsproxy should be the object that all resource controllers hook off.
Paul - 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/
| |