Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1751072AbWIHTKu (ORCPT ); Fri, 8 Sep 2006 15:10:50 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1751082AbWIHTKu (ORCPT ); Fri, 8 Sep 2006 15:10:50 -0400 Received: from e32.co.us.ibm.com ([32.97.110.150]:1514 "EHLO e32.co.us.ibm.com") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751072AbWIHTKs (ORCPT ); Fri, 8 Sep 2006 15:10:48 -0400 Subject: Re: [ckrm-tech] [PATCH] BC: resource beancounters (v4) (added user memory) From: Chandra Seetharaman Reply-To: sekharan@us.ibm.com To: Pavel Emelianov Cc: Rik van Riel , Alan Cox , CKRM-Tech , Dave Hansen , Andi Kleen , Linux Kernel Mailing List , Christoph Hellwig , Andrey Savochkin , Matt Helsley , Hugh Dickins , Alexey Dobriyan , Kirill Korotaev , Oleg Nesterov , devel@openvz.org In-Reply-To: <45011B2A.6000102@openvz.org> References: <44FD918A.7050501@sw.ru> <1157478392.3186.26.camel@localhost.localdomain> <44FED3CA.7000005@sw.ru> <1157579641.31893.26.camel@linuxchandra> <44FFCA4D.9090202@openvz.org> <1157657355.19884.44.camel@linuxchandra> <45011B2A.6000102@openvz.org> Content-Type: text/plain Organization: IBM Date: Fri, 08 Sep 2006 12:10:41 -0700 Message-Id: <1157742641.19884.52.camel@linuxchandra> Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Evolution 2.0.4 (2.0.4-7) Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 2552 Lines: 57 On Fri, 2006-09-08 at 11:26 +0400, Pavel Emelianov wrote: > Chandra Seetharaman wrote: > > On Thu, 2006-09-07 at 11:29 +0400, Pavel Emelianov wrote: > > > > > > > >>>> BUT: I remind you the talks at OKS/OLS and in previous UBC discussions. > >>>> It was noted that having a separate interfaces for CPU, I/O bandwidth > >>>> > >>>> > >>> But, it will be lot simpler for the user to configure/use if they are > >>> together. We should discuss this also. > >>> > >>> > >> IMHO such unification may only imply that one syscall is used to pass > >> configuration info into kernel. > >> Each controller has specific configurating parameters different from the > >> other ones. E.g. CPU controller must assign a "weight" to each group to > >> share CPU time accordingly, but what is a "weight" for memory controller? > >> IO may operate on "bandwidth" and it's not clear what is a "bandwidth" in > >> Kb/sec for CPU controller and so on. > >> > > > > CKRM/RG handles this by eliminating the units from the interface and > > abstracting them to be "shares". Each resource controller converts the > > shares to its own units and handles properly. > > > That's what I'm talking about - common syscall/ioct/etc and each controller > parses its input itself. That's OK for us. Yes, we can eliminate the "units"(KBs, cycles/ticks, pages etc.,) from the interface and use a (unitless) number to specify the amount of resource a resource group/container uses. > > [snip] > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------- > Using Tomcat but need to do more? Need to support web services, security? > Get stuff done quickly with pre-integrated technology to make your job easier > Download IBM WebSphere Application Server v.1.0.1 based on Apache Geronimo > http://sel.as-us.falkag.net/sel?cmd=lnk&kid=120709&bid=263057&dat=121642 > _______________________________________________ > ckrm-tech mailing list > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/ckrm-tech -- ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Chandra Seetharaman | Be careful what you choose.... - sekharan@us.ibm.com | .......you may get it. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- - 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/