From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1762290AbXGKLKX (ORCPT ); Wed, 11 Jul 2007 07:10:23 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1757126AbXGKLKM (ORCPT ); Wed, 11 Jul 2007 07:10:12 -0400 Received: from netops-testserver-3-out.sgi.com ([192.48.171.28]:33148 "EHLO relay.sgi.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-FAIL) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1755641AbXGKLKK (ORCPT ); Wed, 11 Jul 2007 07:10:10 -0400 Date: Wed, 11 Jul 2007 04:10:07 -0700 From: Paul Jackson To: vatsa@linux.vnet.ibm.com Cc: mingo@elte.hu, akpm@linux-foundation.org, menage@google.com, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, containers@lists.osdl.org Subject: Re: containers (was Re: -mm merge plans for 2.6.23) Message-Id: <20070711041007.10ad759c.pj@sgi.com> In-Reply-To: <20070711100323.GA23473@linux.vnet.ibm.com> References: <20070710013152.ef2cd200.akpm@linux-foundation.org> <20070710105240.GA20914@linux.vnet.ibm.com> <6599ad830707101134k29951c45h4af0807603f52b76@mail.gmail.com> <20070710115319.0bdaff34.akpm@linux-foundation.org> <20070711045516.GH2927@linux.vnet.ibm.com> <20070710222942.382fc9ba.akpm@linux-foundation.org> <20070711090423.GA6758@elte.hu> <20070711022352.71604404.pj@sgi.com> <20070711100323.GA23473@linux.vnet.ibm.com> Organization: SGI X-Mailer: Sylpheed version 2.2.4 (GTK+ 2.8.3; i686-pc-linux-gnu) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Srivatsa wrote: > So Ingo was proposing we use cpuset as that user interface to manage > task-groups. This will be only for 2.6.23. Good explanation - thanks. In short, the proposal was to use the task partition defined by cpusets to define CFS task-groups, until the real process containers are available. Or, I see in the next message, Ingo responding favorably to your alternative, using task uid's to partition the tasks into CFS task-groups. Yeah, Ingo's preference for using uid's (or gid's ??) sounds right to me - a sustainable API. Wouldn't want to be adding a cpuset API for a single 2.6.N release. ... gid's -- why not? -- I won't rest till it's the best ... Programmer, Linux Scalability Paul Jackson 1.925.600.0401