Re: [ckrm-tech] [PATCH 5/13] BC: user interface (syscalls)

[Balbir Singh]

Pavel Emelianov wrote:
> Balbir Singh wrote:
> > > +
> > > +asmlinkage long sys_set_bcid(bcid_t id)
> > > +{
> > > +    int error;
> > > +    struct beancounter *bc;
> > > +    struct task_beancounter *task_bc;
> > > +
> > > +    task_bc = &current->task_bc;
> > I was playing around with the bc patches and found that to make
> > use of bc's, I had to actually call set_bcid() and then exec() a
> > task/shell so that the id would stick around. Would you consider
> That sounds very strange as sys_set_bcid() actually changes current's
> exec_bc.
> One note is about mm's bc - mm obtains new bc only after fork or exec -
> that's
> true. But kmemsize starts charging right after the sys_set_bcid.

I was playing around only with kmemsize. I think the reason for my observation
is this

bash --> (my utility) --> set_bcid()

Since bash spawns my utility in a separate process, it creates and assigns
a bean counter to it and then my utility exits. Unless it spawns/exec()'s a
new shell, the beancounter is freed when the task exits (my utility).

> > changing sys_set_bcid to sys_set_task_bcid() or adding a new
> > system call sys_set_task_bcid()? We could pass the pid that we
> > intend to associate with the new id. This also means we'll need
> > locking around to protect task->task_bc.


--

	Balbir Singh,
	Linux Technology Center,
	IBM Software Labs
-
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/