Re: [ckrm-tech] [RFC] Resource Management - Infrastructure choices

[Pavel Emelianov <xemul@openvz.org>]

> Consensus/Debated Points
> ------------------------
> 
> Consensus:
> 
> 	- Provide resource control over a group of tasks 
> 	- Support movement of task from one resource group to another
> 	- Dont support heirarchy for now
> 	- Support limit (soft and/or hard depending on the resource
> 	  type) in controllers. Guarantee feature could be indirectly
> 	  met thr limits.
> 
> Debated:
> 	- syscall vs configfs interface

OK. Let's stop at configfs interface to move...

> 	- Interaction of resource controllers, containers and cpusets
> 		- Should we support, for instance, creation of resource
> 		  groups/containers under a cpuset?
> 	- Should we have different groupings for different resources?

I propose to discuss this question as this is the most important
now from my point of view.

I believe this can be done, but can't imagine how to use this...

> 	- Support movement of all threads of a process from one group
> 	  to another atomically?

I propose such a solution: if a user asks to move /proc/<pid>
then move the whole task with threads.
If user asks to move /proc/<pid>/task/<tid> then move just
a single thread.

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