Re: [RFC, PATCH 0/5] Going forward with Resource Management - A cpu controller

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



I think the risk is that OpenVZ has all the controls and resource
managers we need, while CKRM is still more research-ish. I find the
OpenVZ code much clearer, cleaner and complete at the moment, although
also much more conservative in its approach to solving problems.


I think it would be nice to compare first the features provided by ckrm and openvz at some point and agree upon the minimum common features we need to have as we go forward. For instance I think Openvz assumes that tasks do
not need to move between containers (task-groups), whereas ckrm provides this
flexibility for workload management. This may have some effect on the controller/interface design, no?
OpenVZ assumes that tasks can't move between task-groups for a single reason:
user shouldn't be able to escape from the container.
But this have no implication on the design/implementation.

BTW, do you see any practical use cases for tasks jumping between resource-containers?

Kirill

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

[Index of Archives]     [Kernel Newbies]     [Netfilter]     [Bugtraq]     [Photo]     [Stuff]     [Gimp]     [Yosemite News]     [MIPS Linux]     [ARM Linux]     [Linux Security]     [Linux RAID]     [Video 4 Linux]     [Linux for the blind]     [Linux Resources]
  Powered by Linux