From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1751299AbXCCJjA (ORCPT ); Sat, 3 Mar 2007 04:39:00 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1751306AbXCCJi7 (ORCPT ); Sat, 3 Mar 2007 04:38:59 -0500 Received: from e2.ny.us.ibm.com ([32.97.182.142]:53406 "EHLO e2.ny.us.ibm.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751299AbXCCJi6 (ORCPT ); Sat, 3 Mar 2007 04:38:58 -0500 Date: Sat, 3 Mar 2007 15:08:24 +0530 From: Srivatsa Vaddagiri To: Balbir Singh Cc: menage@google.com, ckrm-tech@lists.sourceforge.net, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, xemul@sw.ru, dev@sw.ru, pj@sgi.com, sam@vilain.net, ebiederm@xmission.com, winget@google.com, containers@lists.osdl.org, serue@us.ibm.com, akpm@linux-foundation.org Subject: Re: [ckrm-tech] [PATCH 1/2] rcfs core patch Message-ID: <20070303093824.GB1028@in.ibm.com> Reply-To: vatsa@in.ibm.com References: <20070301133543.GK15509@in.ibm.com> <20070301134528.GL15509@in.ibm.com> <45E7B0E9.3040202@in.ibm.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <45E7B0E9.3040202@in.ibm.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.11 Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Fri, Mar 02, 2007 at 10:36:49AM +0530, Balbir Singh wrote: > With this don't we end up with a lot of duplicate between cpusets and rcfs. Unless we remove the duplication in cpusets and make it work with rcfs/containers! I wonder if we can avoid so much of filesystem code and use something like configfs to configure the resource objects. In particular I dont know if, using configfs, it is possible to provide a multi-hierarchy feature (each hierarchy bound to separate set of controllers) > > linux-2.6.20-vatsa/include/linux/init_task.h | 4 > > linux-2.6.20-vatsa/include/linux/nsproxy.h | 5 > > linux-2.6.20-vatsa/init/Kconfig | 22 > > linux-2.6.20-vatsa/init/main.c | 1 > > linux-2.6.20-vatsa/kernel/Makefile | 1 > > > > > >--- > > The diffstat does not look quite right. Hmm that was generated using refpatch. Will find out what went wrong. -- Regards, vatsa