From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S2992717AbXCGXR5 (ORCPT ); Wed, 7 Mar 2007 18:17:57 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S2992722AbXCGXR5 (ORCPT ); Wed, 7 Mar 2007 18:17:57 -0500 Received: from ebiederm.dsl.xmission.com ([166.70.28.69]:42705 "EHLO ebiederm.dsl.xmission.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S2992717AbXCGXRz (ORCPT ); Wed, 7 Mar 2007 18:17:55 -0500 From: ebiederm@xmission.com (Eric W. Biederman) To: "Paul Menage" Cc: "Serge E. Hallyn" , "Srivatsa Vaddagiri" , sam@vilain.net, akpm@linux-foundation.org, pj@sgi.com, dev@sw.ru, xemul@sw.ru, containers@lists.osdl.org, winget@google.com, ckrm-tech@lists.sourceforge.net, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/2] resource control file system - aka containers on top of nsproxy! References: <20070301133543.GK15509@in.ibm.com> <6599ad830703061832w49179e75q1dd975369ba8ef39@mail.gmail.com> <20070307173031.GC2336@in.ibm.com> <20070307174346.GA19521@sergelap.austin.ibm.com> <6599ad830703070946s1c6c0535oadff0a109731a4f9@mail.gmail.com> Date: Wed, 07 Mar 2007 16:16:00 -0700 In-Reply-To: <6599ad830703070946s1c6c0535oadff0a109731a4f9@mail.gmail.com> (Paul Menage's message of "Wed, 7 Mar 2007 09:46:35 -0800") Message-ID: User-Agent: Gnus/5.110006 (No Gnus v0.6) Emacs/21.4 (gnu/linux) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org "Paul Menage" writes: > No, Sam was saying that nsproxy should be the object that all resource > controllers hook off. I think implementation wise this tends to make sense. However it should have nothing to do with semantics. If we have a lot of independent resource controllers. Placing the pointer to their data structures directly in nsproxy instead of in task_struct sounds like a reasonable idea but it should not be user visible. Eric