Messages in this thread | | | Date | Fri, 3 Dec 2004 16:40:34 -0800 | From | Andrew Morton <> | Subject | Re: [ckrm-tech] Re: [PATCH] CKRM: 0/10 Class Based Kernel Resource Management |
| |
"Marc E. Fiuczynski" <mef@CS.Princeton.EDU> wrote: > > I integrated CKRM with the kernel used by PlanetLab (www.planet-lab.org), > and I believe we (PlanetLab) are the first to use CKRM in a production > setting. > ... > Hope this helps.
It does, thanks.
A concern which I have about the CKRM implementation is that the patches which have been sent out appear to be simply the "core" of CKRM, plus minimally-intrusive hooks. I have the impression that this core will not be terribly useful to real-world users and that follow-on patches will be required to add more functionality and to wire up more instrumentation and control points.
I would not like to be in a situation where we merge the "core" patch, but the as-yet-unseen follow-on patches which make CKRM useful and complete end up creating a big unmaintainable mess. We end up not wanting to go forwards and being unable to go backwards.
IOW: I think we need to see a reasonably-close-to-final implementation of CKRM before we can take it much further. - 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/
| |