Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S265099AbUD3Qpv (ORCPT ); Fri, 30 Apr 2004 12:45:51 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S265112AbUD3Qpv (ORCPT ); Fri, 30 Apr 2004 12:45:51 -0400 Received: from phoenix.infradead.org ([213.86.99.234]:10247 "EHLO phoenix.infradead.org") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S265099AbUD3Qpt (ORCPT ); Fri, 30 Apr 2004 12:45:49 -0400 Date: Fri, 30 Apr 2004 17:45:43 +0100 From: Christoph Hellwig To: Rik van Riel Cc: Erik Jacobson , Paul Jackson , chrisw@osdl.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH] Process Aggregates (PAGG) support for the 2.6 kernel Message-ID: <20040430174543.A13431@infradead.org> Mail-Followup-To: Christoph Hellwig , Rik van Riel , Erik Jacobson , Paul Jackson , chrisw@osdl.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org References: <20040430140611.A11636@infradead.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline User-Agent: Mutt/1.2.5.1i In-Reply-To: ; from riel@redhat.com on Fri, Apr 30, 2004 at 11:22:49AM -0400 Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 819 Lines: 17 On Fri, Apr 30, 2004 at 11:22:49AM -0400, Rik van Riel wrote: > > Again, pagg doesn't even play in that league. It's really just a tiny > > meachnism to allow a kernel module keep per-process data. Policies like > > process-groups can be implemented on top of that. > > So basically you're arguing that PAGG is better because it > doesn't do what's needed ? ;) I told you a bunch of times that's it's a different thing. Simply keeping per-process state might be a useful building block for some monster resource whatever fuckup, but certainly not the other way around. - 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/