From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1767697AbXCJBAp (ORCPT ); Fri, 9 Mar 2007 20:00:45 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1767698AbXCJBAp (ORCPT ); Fri, 9 Mar 2007 20:00:45 -0500 Received: from MAIL.13thfloor.at ([213.145.232.33]:34846 "EHLO MAIL.13thfloor.at" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1767697AbXCJBAo (ORCPT ); Fri, 9 Mar 2007 20:00:44 -0500 Date: Sat, 10 Mar 2007 02:00:41 +0100 From: Herbert Poetzl To: Paul Jackson Cc: vatsa@in.ibm.com, menage@google.com, ebiederm@xmission.com, winget@google.com, containers@lists.osdl.org, akpm@linux-foundation.org, ckrm-tech@lists.sourceforge.net, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, xemul@sw.ru Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/2] rcfs core patch Message-ID: <20070310010041.GD3647@MAIL.13thfloor.at> Mail-Followup-To: Paul Jackson , vatsa@in.ibm.com, menage@google.com, ebiederm@xmission.com, winget@google.com, containers@lists.osdl.org, akpm@linux-foundation.org, ckrm-tech@lists.sourceforge.net, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, xemul@sw.ru References: <20070301133543.GK15509@in.ibm.com> <20070301134528.GL15509@in.ibm.com> <20070308101347.GA29051@in.ibm.com> <20070309004816.GB4506@MAIL.13thfloor.at> <20070309181422.GB21661@in.ibm.com> <20070309112547.3e82deca.pj@sgi.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20070309112547.3e82deca.pj@sgi.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 09, 2007 at 11:25:47AM -0800, Paul Jackson wrote: > > Ease of use maybe. Scripts can be more readily used with a fs-based > > interface. > > And, as I might have already stated, file system API's are a natural > fit for hierarchically shaped data, especially if the nodes in the > hierarchy would benefit from file system like permission attributes. personally, I'd prefer to avoid hierarchical structures wherever possible, because they tend to make processing and checks a lot more complicated than necessary, and if we really want hierarchical structures, it might be more than sufficient to keep the hierarchy in userspace, and use a flat representation inside the kernel ... but hey, I'm all for running a hypervisor under a hypervisor running inside a hypervisor :) best, Herbert > -- > I won't rest till it's the best ... > Programmer, Linux Scalability > Paul Jackson 1.925.600.0401 > _______________________________________________ > Containers mailing list > Containers@lists.osdl.org > https://lists.osdl.org/mailman/listinfo/containers