Re: [RFC, PATCH 0/5] Going forward with Resource Management - A cpucontroller

[Paul Jackson]

pj wrote:
> I haven't read it yet, but I will likely agree that
> this is an abuse of cpusets.

This likely just drove Srivatsa up a wall (sorry), as my comments
in the earlier thread he referenced:

  http://lkml.org/lkml/2005/9/26/58

enthusiastically supported adding a cpu controller interface to cpusets.

We need to think through what are the relations between CKRM
controllers, containers and cpusets.  But I don't think that
people will naturally want to manage CKRM controllers via cpusets.
That sounds odd to me now.  My earlier enthusiasm for it seems
wrong to me now.

-- 
                  I won't rest till it's the best ...
                  Programmer, Linux Scalability
                  Paul Jackson <pj@xxxxxxx> 1.925.600.0401
-
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/