Re: [patch02/05]: Containers(V2)- Generic Linux kernel changes

[Andi Kleen <ak@suse.de>]

On Wednesday 20 September 2006 18:44, Rohit Seth wrote:
> On Wed, 2006-09-20 at 13:27 +0200, Andi Kleen wrote:
> > Rohit Seth <rohitseth@google.com> writes:
> > >  					 */
> > > +#ifdef CONFIG_CONTAINERS
> > > +	struct container_struct *ctn; /* Pointer to container, may be NULL */
> > > +#endif
> > 
> > I still don't think it's a good idea to add a pointer to struct page for this.
> 
> I thought last time you supported adding a pointer to struct page (when
> you mentioned next gen slab will also consume page->mapping).  

I didn't. Alternative was a separate data structure.

> which one...I think the fields in page structure are already getting
> doubly used. 

There are lots of different cases. At least for anonymous memory 
->mapping should be free. Perhaps that could be used for anonymous
memory and a separate data structure for the important others.

slab should have at least one field free too, although it might be a different
one (iirc Christoph's rewrite uses more than the current slab, but it would
surprise me if he needed all) 
 
> > BTW your patchkit seems to be also in wrong order in that when 02 is applied
> > it won't compile.
> 
> Not sure if I understood that.  I've myself tested these patches on
> 2.6.18-rc6-mm2 kernel and they apply just fine.  Are you just trying to
> apply 02....if so then that wouldn't suffice.

I meant assuming the patchkit was applied you would break binary search
inbetween because not each piece compiles on its own.

-Andi