Re: [RFC, PATCH 0/5] Going forward with Resource Management - A cpu controller

From: Srivatsa Vaddagiri
Date: Fri Aug 04 2006 - 07:34:58 EST

On Fri, Aug 04, 2006 at 10:49:10AM +0100, Alan Cox wrote:
> I think the risk is that OpenVZ has all the controls and resource
> managers we need, while CKRM is still more research-ish. I find the
> OpenVZ code much clearer, cleaner and complete at the moment, although
> also much more conservative in its approach to solving problems.

I think it would be nice to compare first the features provided by ckrm and
openvz at some point and agree upon the minimum common features we need to have
as we go forward. For instance I think Openvz assumes that tasks do
not need to move between containers (task-groups), whereas ckrm provides this
flexibility for workload management. This may have some effect on the
controller/interface design, no?

To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at
Please read the FAQ at