Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S970924AbXFHUGl (ORCPT ); Fri, 8 Jun 2007 16:06:41 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1751575AbXFHUFW (ORCPT ); Fri, 8 Jun 2007 16:05:22 -0400 Received: from netops-testserver-3-out.sgi.com ([192.48.171.28]:47892 "EHLO relay.sgi.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-FAIL) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1030633AbXFHUFT (ORCPT ); Fri, 8 Jun 2007 16:05:19 -0400 Date: Fri, 8 Jun 2007 13:05:17 -0700 From: Paul Jackson To: "Serge E. Hallyn" Cc: menage@google.com, vatsa@in.ibm.com, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, ckrm-tech@lists.sourceforge.net, balbir@in.ibm.com, haveblue@us.ibm.com, xemul@sw.ru, dev@sw.ru, containers@lists.osdl.org, ebiederm@xmission.com, mbligh@google.com, rohitseth@google.com, serue@us.ibm.com, akpm@linux-foundation.org, svaidy@linux.vnet.ibm.com, cpw@sgi.com, devel@openvz.org, serge@hallyn.com Subject: Re: [ckrm-tech] [PATCH 00/10] Containers(V10): Generic Process Containers Message-Id: <20070608130517.8e2c5d51.pj@sgi.com> In-Reply-To: <20070608194247.GA12671@vino.hallyn.com> References: <20070607180158.GA936@sergelap.austin.ibm.com> <20070607122121.24fe6ff4.pj@sgi.com> <20070607201723.GA17011@sergelap.austin.ibm.com> <20070607150113.f020d8f8.pj@sgi.com> <20070608143250.GA7728@vino.hallyn.com> <6599ad830706080855n22612814u4805d34a295b165f@mail.gmail.com> <20070608160840.GA11133@vino.hallyn.com> <6599ad830706080916j477e08c0l8b142d9a0d832c76@mail.gmail.com> <20070608180837.GA5683@sergelap.austin.ibm.com> <6599ad830706081113g56e755c6vc5cd0fbd5c15697@mail.gmail.com> <20070608194247.GA12671@vino.hallyn.com> Organization: SGI X-Mailer: Sylpheed version 2.2.4 (GTK+ 2.8.3; i686-pc-linux-gnu) Mime-Version: 1.0 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: 1016 Lines: 29 Serge wrote: > Paul (Jackson), is this comment added in cpusets close enough to what > you were asking for? This comment? + * Currently we refuse to set up the container - thereby + * refusing the task to be entered, and as a result refusing + * the sys_unshare() or clone() which initiated it - if any + * sibling cpusets have exclusive cpus or mem. + * + * If this becomes a problem for some users who wish to + * allow that scenario, then cpuset_post_clone() could be + * changed to grant parent->cpus_allowed-sibling_cpus_exclusive + * (and likewise for mems) to the new container. Nice - thanks. -- I won't rest till it's the best ... Programmer, Linux Scalability Paul Jackson 1.925.600.0401 - 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/