Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1751677AbWIUWHv (ORCPT ); Thu, 21 Sep 2006 18:07:51 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1751678AbWIUWHv (ORCPT ); Thu, 21 Sep 2006 18:07:51 -0400 Received: from smtp-out.google.com ([216.239.45.12]:19252 "EHLO smtp-out.google.com") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751676AbWIUWHu (ORCPT ); Thu, 21 Sep 2006 18:07:50 -0400 DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; s=beta; d=google.com; c=nofws; q=dns; h=received:message-id:date:from:to:subject:cc:in-reply-to: mime-version:content-type:content-transfer-encoding: content-disposition:references; b=jFrFeq1ARYKMGiWhnCswPYPnyXi2aZ8ZKYtbUpfHX0Uq+ZuzsOUMY9arDnNlIf6jp 3Bb1+rdH6x65iZtZjnRLQ== Message-ID: <6599ad830609211507m1f5965d8ucfcb58dd86c97c74@mail.google.com> Date: Thu, 21 Sep 2006 15:07:42 -0700 From: "Paul Menage" To: "Paul Jackson" Subject: Re: [ckrm-tech] [patch00/05]: Containers(V2)- Introduction Cc: sekharan@us.ibm.com, npiggin@suse.de, ckrm-tech@lists.sourceforge.net, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, rohitseth@google.com, devel@openvz.org, clameter@sgi.com In-Reply-To: <20060921145946.8d9ace73.pj@sgi.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline References: <1158718568.29000.44.camel@galaxy.corp.google.com> <1158798715.6536.115.camel@linuxchandra> <20060920173638.370e774a.pj@sgi.com> <6599ad830609201742h71d112f4tae8fe390cb874c0b@mail.google.com> <1158803120.6536.139.camel@linuxchandra> <6599ad830609201852k12cee6eey9086247c9bdec8b@mail.google.com> <1158869186.6536.205.camel@linuxchandra> <6599ad830609211310s4e036e55h89bab26432d83c11@mail.google.com> <20060921145946.8d9ace73.pj@sgi.com> Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 696 Lines: 17 On 9/21/06, Paul Jackson wrote: > > Can the generic container avoid performance bottlenecks due to locks > or other hot cache lines on the main code paths for fork, exit, page > allocation and task scheduling? Page allocation and task scheduling are resource controller issues, not generic process container issues. The generic process containers would have essentially the same overheads for fork/exit that cpusets have currently. Paul - 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/