Re: [ckrm-tech] [patch00/05]: Containers(V2)- Introduction

From: Chandra Seetharaman
Date: Thu Sep 21 2006 - 20:57:43 EST


On Thu, 2006-09-21 at 17:24 -0700, Paul Jackson wrote:
> Chandra wrote:
> > There are two (competing) memory controllers in the kernel. But, distro
> > can turn only one ON.
>
> Huh - time for me to play the dummy again ...
>
> My (fog shrouded) vision of the future has:
> 1) mempolicy - provides fine grained memory placement for task on self
> 2) cpuset - provides system wide cpu and memory placement for unrelated tasks
> 3) some form of resource groups - measures and limits proportion of various
> resources used, including cpu cycles, memory pages and network bandwidth,
> by collections of tasks.k
>
> Both (2) and (3) need to group tasks in flexible ways distinct from the
> existing task groupings supported by the kernel.
>
> I thought that Paul M suggested (2) and (3) use common underlying
> grouping or 'bucket' technology - the infrastructure that separates
> tasks into buckets and can be used to associate various resource
> metrics and limits with each bucket.
>
> I can't quite figure out whether you have in mind above:
> * a conflict between two competing memory controllers for (3),

Yes.
> * or a conflict between cpusets and one memory controller for (3).

No.
>
> And either way, I don't see what that has to do with the underling
> bucket technology - how we group tasks generically.

True. I clarified it in the reply to Paul M.
>
> Guess I am missing something ...
>
--

----------------------------------------------------------------------
Chandra Seetharaman | Be careful what you choose....
- sekharan@xxxxxxxxxx | .......you may get it.
----------------------------------------------------------------------


-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/