Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S932594AbWHDP1F (ORCPT ); Fri, 4 Aug 2006 11:27:05 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S932589AbWHDP1F (ORCPT ); Fri, 4 Aug 2006 11:27:05 -0400 Received: from e33.co.us.ibm.com ([32.97.110.151]:31438 "EHLO e33.co.us.ibm.com") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S932566AbWHDP1D (ORCPT ); Fri, 4 Aug 2006 11:27:03 -0400 Date: Fri, 4 Aug 2006 21:01:23 +0530 From: Srivatsa Vaddagiri To: Kirill Korotaev Cc: Alan Cox , Andrew Morton , mingo@elte.hu, nickpiggin@yahoo.com.au, sam@vilain.net, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, dev@openvz.org, efault@gmx.de, balbir@in.ibm.com, sekharan@us.ibm.com, nagar@watson.ibm.com, haveblue@us.ibm.com, pj@sgi.com Subject: Re: [RFC, PATCH 0/5] Going forward with Resource Management - A cpu controller Message-ID: <20060804153123.GB32412@in.ibm.com> Reply-To: vatsa@in.ibm.com References: <20060804050753.GD27194@in.ibm.com> <20060803223650.423f2e6a.akpm@osdl.org> <20060803224253.49068b98.akpm@osdl.org> <1154684950.23655.178.camel@localhost.localdomain> <20060804114109.GA28988@in.ibm.com> <44D35F0B.5000801@sw.ru> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <44D35F0B.5000801@sw.ru> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.11 Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 1379 Lines: 31 On Fri, Aug 04, 2006 at 06:51:55PM +0400, Kirill Korotaev wrote: > 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. Doesnt the ability to move tasks between groups dynamically affect (atleast) memory controller design (in giving up ownership etc)? Also if we need to support this movement, we need to have some corresponding system call/file-system interface which supports this move operation. > BTW, do you see any practical use cases for tasks jumping between > resource-containers? The use cases I have heard of which would benefit such a feature is (say) for database threads which want to change their "resource affinity" status depending on which customer query they are currently handling. If they are handling a query for a "important" customer, they will want affinied to a high bandwidth resource container and later if they start handling a less important query they will want to give up this affinity and instead move to a low-bandwidth container. -- Regards, vatsa - 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/