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

[Kirill Korotaev]

> > 3. I also don't understand why normal binary interface like system call
> > is not used.
> >  We have set_uid, sys_setrlimit and it works pretty good, does it?
>
>
> If there are no hierarchies, a syscall interface is fine since the namespace
> for the task-group is flat (so one can export to userspace either a number or a
> string as a handle to that task-group for operations like create, delete,
> set limit, get usage, etc)
syscalls work fine here as well. you need to specify parent_id and new_id for creation.
that's all. we have such an interfaces for heirarchical CPU scheduler.

> A filesystem based interface is useful when you have hierarchies (as resource
> groups and cpusets do) since it naturally defines a convenient to use
> hierarchical namespace.
but it is not much convinient for applications then.

Thanks,
Kirill

-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/