Re: [ckrm-tech] [PATCH 0/2] resource control file system - aka containers on top of nsproxy!

[Srivatsa Vaddagiri]

On Fri, Mar 09, 2007 at 10:04:30PM +0530, Srivatsa Vaddagiri wrote:
> 2. Regarding space savings, if 100 tasks are in a container (I dont know
>    what is a typical number) -and- lets say that all tasks are to share
>    the same resource allocation (which seems to be natural), then having
>    a 'struct container_group *' pointer in each task_struct seems to be not 
>    very efficient (simply because we dont need that task-level granularity of
>    managing resource allocation).

Note that this 'struct container_group *' pointer is in addition to the
'struct nsproxy *' pointer already in task_struct. If the set of tasks
over which resorce control is applied is typically the same set of tasks
which share the same 'struct nsproxy *' pointer, then IMHO 'struct
container_group *' in each task_struct is not very optimal.

-- 
Regards,
vatsa
-
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/