From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S965336AbXCPOuo (ORCPT ); Fri, 16 Mar 2007 10:50:44 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S965351AbXCPOuo (ORCPT ); Fri, 16 Mar 2007 10:50:44 -0400 Received: from e4.ny.us.ibm.com ([32.97.182.144]:41336 "EHLO e4.ny.us.ibm.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S965336AbXCPOun (ORCPT ); Fri, 16 Mar 2007 10:50:43 -0400 Date: Fri, 16 Mar 2007 20:27:49 +0530 From: Srivatsa Vaddagiri To: Paul Menage , ckrm-tech@lists.sourceforge.net, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, xemul@sw.ru, pj@sgi.com, ebiederm@xmission.com, winget@google.com, containers@lists.osdl.org, akpm@linux-foundation.org Subject: Re: Summary of resource management discussion Message-ID: <20070316145749.GA4760@in.ibm.com> Reply-To: vatsa@in.ibm.com References: <20070312124226.GD17151@in.ibm.com> <6599ad830703150424t3478cd55mf9d2699f3669c9f0@mail.gmail.com> <20070315170435.GA28692@in.ibm.com> <20070316141915.GA6572@MAIL.13thfloor.at> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20070316141915.GA6572@MAIL.13thfloor.at> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.11 Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Fri, Mar 16, 2007 at 03:19:16PM +0100, Herbert Poetzl wrote: > > Do you see any drawbacks of doing like this? What will break if we do > > this? > > looks good to me, except for the potential issue with > the double indirection introducing too much overhear Sure. I plan to get some numbers with and without the indirection in nsproxy. I was planning to get these numbers with a prelimnary CPU controller I wrote a while back (http://lkml.org/lkml/2006/9/28/236 and http://lkml.org/lkml/2007/1/26/12). Do you have plans to publish any CPU controller in the short term as well? -- Regards, vatsa