[lkml]   [2006]   [Aug]   [4]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
SubjectRe: [RFC, PATCH 0/5] Going forward with Resource Management - A cpu controller
>>I think the risk is that OpenVZ has all the controls and resource
>>managers we need, while CKRM is still more research-ish. I find the
>>OpenVZ code much clearer, cleaner and complete at the moment, although
>>also much more conservative in its approach to solving problems.
> I think it would be nice to compare first the features provided by ckrm and
> openvz at some point and agree upon the minimum common features we need to have
> as we go forward. For instance I think Openvz assumes that tasks do
> not need to move between containers (task-groups), whereas ckrm provides this
> flexibility for workload management. This may have some effect on the
> controller/interface design, no?
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.

BTW, do you see any practical use cases for tasks jumping between resource-containers?


To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to
More majordomo info at
Please read the FAQ at

 \ /
  Last update: 2006-08-04 16:53    [W:0.069 / U:1.636 seconds]
©2003-2018 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site