Re: [ckrm-tech] [RFC] Resource Management - Infrastructure choices

[Matt Helsley]

On Thu, 2006-11-02 at 12:08 +0300, Pavel Emelianov wrote:
> [snip]
> 
> > I think that having a "tasks" file and a "threads" file in each
> > container directory would be a clean way to handle it:
> > 
> > "tasks" : read/write complete process members
> > "threads" : read/write individual thread members
> 
> I've just thought of it.
> 
> Beancounter may have more than 409 tasks, while configfs
> doesn't allow attributes to store more than PAGE_SIZE bytes
> on read. So how would you fill so many tasks in one page?

	To be clear that's a limitation of configfs as an interface. In the
Resource Groups code, for example, there is no hard limitation on length
of the underlying list. This is why we're talking about a filesystem
interface and not necessarily a configfs interface.

> I like the idea of writing pids/tids to these files, but
> printing them back is not that easy.

	That depends on how you do it. For instance, if you don't have an
explicit list of tasks in the group (rough cost: 1 list head per task)
then yes, it could be difficult.

Cheers,
	-Matt Helsley

-
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/