Messages in this thread |  | | | Subject | Re: [patch02/05]: Containers(V2)- Generic Linux kernel changes | | From | Rohit Seth <> | | Date | Wed, 20 Sep 2006 09:44:29 -0700 |
| |
On Wed, 2006-09-20 at 13:27 +0200, Andi Kleen wrote: > Rohit Seth <rohitseth@google.com> writes: > > */ > > +#ifdef CONFIG_CONTAINERS > > + struct container_struct *ctn; /* Pointer to container, may be NULL */ > > +#endif > > I still don't think it's a good idea to add a pointer to struct page for this.
I thought last time you supported adding a pointer to struct page (when you mentioned next gen slab will also consume page->mapping). May be I missed your point.
> This means any kernel that enables the config would need to carry this significant > overhead, no matter if containers are used to not. > Sure this is non-zero overhead but I think this is the logical place to track the memory.
> Better would be to store them in some other data structure that is only > allocated on demand or figure out a way to store them in the sometimes > not all used fields in struct page. >
which one...I think the fields in page structure are already getting doubly used.
> BTW your patchkit seems to be also in wrong order in that when 02 is applied > it won't compile.
Not sure if I understood that. I've myself tested these patches on 2.6.18-rc6-mm2 kernel and they apply just fine. Are you just trying to apply 02....if so then that wouldn't suffice. -rohit
- 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/
|  |