Re: [RFC][PATCH 1/5] Virtualization/containers: startup

From: Jeff Garzik
Date: Fri Feb 03 2006 - 13:53:42 EST


Dave Hansen wrote:
On Fri, 2006-02-03 at 09:49 -0800, Linus Torvalds wrote:

One thing I don't particularly like is some of the naming. To me "vps" doesn't sound particularly generic or logical. I realize that it probably makes perfect sense to you (and I assume it just means "virtual private servers"), but especially if you see patches 1-3 to really be independent of any "actual" virtualization code that is totally generic, I'd actually prefer a less specialized name.


I just did a global s/vps/container/ and it looks pretty reasonable, at
least from my point of view.

I would have chosen the much shorter "box" or "jar", but that's just me :)


"tsk->owner_container" That makes it sound like a pointer to the "task
owner's container". How about "owning_container"? The "container
owning this task". Or, maybe just "container"?

slip 'parent' in there...


Any particular reason for the "u32 id" in the vps_info struct as opposed
to one of the more generic types? Do we want to abstract this one in
the same way we do pid_t?

The "host" in "host_container_info" doesn't mean much to me. Though, I
guess it has some context in the UML space. Would "init_container_info"
or "root_container_info" be more descriptive?

probably

Jeff


-
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/