Re: [ckrm-tech] [RFC][PATCH 2/7] UBC: core (structures, API)

[Chandra Seetharaman <sekharan@us.ibm.com>]

On Thu, 2006-08-17 at 18:02 +0400, Kirill Korotaev wrote:
<snip>
> >>+static void init_beancounter_syslimits(struct user_beancounter *ub)
> >>+{
> >>+	int k;
> >>+
> >>+	for (k = 0; k < UB_RESOURCES; k++)
> >>+		ub->ub_parms[k].barrier = ub->ub_parms[k].limit;
> > 
> > 
> > This sets barrier to 0. Is this value of 0 interpreted differently by
> > different controllers? One way to interpret it is "dont allocate any
> > resource", other way to interpret it is "don't care - give me what you
> > can" (which makes sense for stuff like CPU and network bandwidth).
> every patch which adds a resource modifies this function and sets
> some default limit. Check: [PATCH 5/7] UBC: kernel memory accounting (core)

The idea of upper layer code changing the lower layer's code doesn't
sound good. May be you can think of defining some interface to do it.

> 
> Thanks,
> Kirill
> 
> 
> -------------------------------------------------------------------------
> Using Tomcat but need to do more? Need to support web services, security?
> Get stuff done quickly with pre-integrated technology to make your job easier
> Download IBM WebSphere Application Server v.1.0.1 based on Apache Geronimo
> http://sel.as-us.falkag.net/sel?cmd=lnk&kid=120709&bid=263057&dat=121642
> _______________________________________________
> ckrm-tech mailing list
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/ckrm-tech
-- 

----------------------------------------------------------------------
    Chandra Seetharaman               | Be careful what you choose....
              - sekharan@us.ibm.com   |      .......you may get it.
----------------------------------------------------------------------