Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S932561AbVKOXPJ (ORCPT ); Tue, 15 Nov 2005 18:15:09 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S932562AbVKOXPI (ORCPT ); Tue, 15 Nov 2005 18:15:08 -0500 Received: from mtagate2.uk.ibm.com ([195.212.29.135]:45993 "EHLO mtagate2.uk.ibm.com") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S932561AbVKOXPG (ORCPT ); Tue, 15 Nov 2005 18:15:06 -0500 Message-ID: <437A6BF5.9040901@fr.ibm.com> Date: Wed, 16 Nov 2005 00:15:01 +0100 From: Cedric Le Goater User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird 1.0.7-1.1.fc4 (X11/20050929) X-Accept-Language: en-us, en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Paul Jackson CC: "Serge E. Hallyn" , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, frankeh@watson.ibm.com, haveblue@us.ibm.com Subject: Re: [RFC] [PATCH 00/13] Introduce task_pid api References: <20051114212341.724084000@sergelap> <20051114153649.75e265e7.pj@sgi.com> <20051115010155.GA3792@IBM-BWN8ZTBWAO1> <20051114175140.06c5493a.pj@sgi.com> <20051115022931.GB6343@sergelap.austin.ibm.com> <20051114193715.1dd80786.pj@sgi.com> <20051115051501.GA3252@IBM-BWN8ZTBWAO1> <20051114223513.3145db39.pj@sgi.com> <20051115081100.GA2488@IBM-BWN8ZTBWAO1> <20051115010624.2ca9237d.pj@sgi.com> <20051115190030.GA16790@sergelap.austin.ibm.com> <20051115141146.5add977c.pj@sgi.com> In-Reply-To: <20051115141146.5add977c.pj@sgi.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 1330 Lines: 34 Paul Jackson wrote: > Oh dear. I'm drifting away from advocating a pid-range preallocation > and toward thinking we need a more systematic approach, design and > architecture. This isn't just pids. Simple range based preallocation > won't help much on some of the other resources that we need to virtualize. Ah ! you said the word: "virtualize". > The Zap pods are sounding good to me right now, properly embedded > in the kernel rather than hacking the syscall table via a module. hacking the syscall table via a module is evil and does not work. You can't hack pids in a signal siginfo that way, you won't support NPTL, etc. > In any case, I am suspecting that starting the job in some sort > of nice container should be a prerequisite for relocating or > checkpoint/restarting the job. Indeed. Did you ever think about using PAGG as a foundation for a checkpoint/restart container ? Aggregation and isolation are key requirements for checkpoint/restart. And then, the next one that comes on the list is private namespace or virtualization, depends how you call it :) C. - 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/