Re: [ckrm-tech] [PATCH] BC: resource beancounters (v4) (added usermemory)

[Balbir Singh]

Chandra Seetharaman wrote:
> On Thu, 2006-09-07 at 00:47 +0530, Balbir Singh wrote:
>
> <snip>
> > Some not quite so urgent ones - like support for guarantees. I think this can
>
> IMO, guarantee support should be considered to be part of the
> infrastructure. Controller functionalities/implementation will be
> different with/without guarantee support. In other words, adding
> guarantee feature later will cause re-implementations.

Thanks for pointing this out. Thats what I implied in the comment below.

> > be worked out as we make progress.
> >
> > > I agree with these requirements and lets move into this direction.
> > > But moving so far can't be done without accepting:
> > > 1. core functionality
> > > 2. accounting
> > Some of the core functionality might be a limiting factor for the requirements.
> > Lets agree on the requirements, I think its a great step forward and then
> > build the core functionality with these requirements in mind.
> >
> > > Thanks,
> > > Kirill


--

	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/