Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1751180AbWBCQZc (ORCPT ); Fri, 3 Feb 2006 11:25:32 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1751196AbWBCQZc (ORCPT ); Fri, 3 Feb 2006 11:25:32 -0500 Received: from e6.ny.us.ibm.com ([32.97.182.146]:35244 "EHLO e6.ny.us.ibm.com") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751180AbWBCQZb (ORCPT ); Fri, 3 Feb 2006 11:25:31 -0500 Subject: Re: [RFC][PATCH 5/7] VPIDs: vpid/pid conversion in VPID enabled case From: Dave Hansen To: Alexey Kuznetsov Cc: Cedric Le Goater , Kirill Korotaev , serue@us.ibm.com, arjan@infradead.org, frankeh@watson.ibm.com, mrmacman_g4@mac.com, alan@lxorguk.ukuu.org.uk, Linux Kernel Mailing List , devel@openvz.org In-Reply-To: <20060203140229.GA16266@ms2.inr.ac.ru> References: <43E22B2D.1040607@openvz.org> <43E23398.7090608@openvz.org> <1138899951.29030.30.camel@localhost.localdomain> <20060203105202.GA21819@ms2.inr.ac.ru> <43E35105.3080208@fr.ibm.com> <20060203140229.GA16266@ms2.inr.ac.ru> Content-Type: text/plain Date: Fri, 03 Feb 2006 08:25:18 -0800 Message-Id: <1138983918.6189.22.camel@localhost.localdomain> Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Evolution 2.4.1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 1398 Lines: 30 On Fri, 2006-02-03 at 17:02 +0300, Alexey Kuznetsov wrote: > 1. Replacing all the references to pid with pair (container, pid) is quite > expensive. F.e. it is possible that a task has a pid from one container, > but it is in process group and/or session of another container, > and its controlling terminal owner by another container. Grr.. > So, the structures are bloated, the functions get additional arguments. > And all this is for no real purpose, the functionality comparing with > VPID is even reduced. I don't think anything gets bloated, at least in the default case. Every task points to one and only one container. Things that currently take tasks as arguments still take tasks. If something handling tasks suddenly needs to worry about containers as well, we simply infer the container from the task. In the very, very rare cases where we can't do that (like a fork() boundary), we _do_ change the APIs to take both task and container. However, these are few and far between, so it isn't that much of a headache. In the cases where pids were referenced, and are no longer unique, we use Eric's weak task references. Right? -- Dave - 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/