Re: [Devel] OLS paper topics

[Balbir Singh <balbir-23VcF4HTsmIX0ybBhKVfKdBPR1lH4CV8@public.gmane.org>]

Cedric Le Goater wrote:
> 
>>> == Topic ==
>>>
>>> Namespaces, containers, cgroups, and container checkpoint/restart.
>>>
>>> == Description ==
>>>
>>> Development for namespaces and cgroups is well underway in the
>>> mainline kernel. To keep momentum going and keep the loosely
>>> knit teams of developers well-coordinated, a physical meeting in
>>> which to discuss future development plans is needed.
>>> Additionally, we are at a point where crucial decisions about
>>> the nature of a "container object" and about the checkpoint/restart
>>> design need to be made.
>>>
>>> A final set of topics will be decided upon through mailing lists
>>> ahead of time, but potential topics include:
>>> * Handling filesystem/namespace synchronization
>>> * Handling of /proc and /sysfs within containers
>>> * Additional needed namespaces (i.e. device namespace)
>>> * Nature of a 'container' — kernel object or userspace fiction
>>> * Additional cgroups and their design
>>> * How to initiate and synchronize checkpoint/restart
>>> * How to enter a 'container' ?
>>>
>>
>> Resource Management for containers?
> 
> Yes we need that. There are a few possible conflicts in requirements
> that need to be discussed. For example, a resource management req
> would be to be able to move a process from one group to another and C/R
> wouldn't.

Cedric,

Why is that a conflict w.r.t resource management, isn't that more of a cgroup
feature - task migration. We need task migration for resource management, but
task migration is a system administrator/management function. I don't see the
conflict, but may be I am missing something very obvious.

>>> == Moderators ==
>>> {{Out|These are just suggestions, please edit here or let us know if you
>>> do or do not want to moderate.}}
>>>
>>> * Namespaces/containers: Serge Hallyn, Cedric Le Goater
>>> * cgroups: Paul Menage
>>> * Checkpoint/restart: Dave Hansen, Cedric Le Goater
> 
> IMO, 2 is a minimum to get the work done (it will require a minimum of
> organization) but the moderators don't necessarily have to be from the
> same team.
> 
> Or, having some one in charge of the logistics would be better ? In that
> case, you can remove me from the moderators.
> 
>> Resource Management? - I don't mind moderating that if it happens to be
>> included in the summit or can we merge it with cgroups?
> 
> Good thing.
> 
> Cheers,
> 
> C.


-- 
	Warm Regards,
	Balbir Singh
	Linux Technology Center
	IBM, ISTL