Re: [RFC][PATCH 1/1] Expose per-node reclaim and migration to userspace

[Nick Piggin <nickpiggin@yahoo.com.au>]

Paul Menage wrote:
> On 11/28/06, Nick Piggin <nickpiggin@yahoo.com.au> wrote:

>> Can you not wire it up to your resource isolation
>> implementation in the kernel?
> 
> 
> This *is* the resource isolation implementation (plus the existing
> cpusets and fake-numa code). The intention is to expose just enough
> knobs/hooks to userspace that it can be handled there.

Yes, but when you migrate tasks between these containers, or when you
create/destroy them, then why can't you do the migration at that time?

>> ... yeah it would obviously be much nicer to do it in kernel space,
>> behind your higher level APIs.
> 
> 
> I don't think it would - keeping as much of the code as possible in
> userspace makes development and deployment much faster. We don't
> really have any higher-level APIs at this point - just userspace
> middleware manipulating cpusets.

We can't use that as an argument for the upstream kernel, but I
would believe that it is a good choice for google.

-- 
SUSE Labs, Novell Inc.
Send instant messages to your online friends http://au.messenger.yahoo.com 

--
To unsubscribe, send a message with 'unsubscribe linux-mm' in
the body to majordomo@kvack.org.  For more info on Linux MM,
see: http://www.linux-mm.org/ .
Don't email: <a href=mailto:"dont@kvack.org"> email@kvack.org </a>