Messages in this thread | | | Subject | Re: [PATCH 0/9] namespaces: Introduction | From | (Eric W. Biederman) | Date | Fri, 19 May 2006 02:50:19 -0600 |
| |
"Serge E. Hallyn" <serue@us.ibm.com> writes:
> This patchset introduces a per-process utsname namespace. These can > be used by openvz, vserver, and application migration to virtualize and > isolate utsname info (i.e. hostname). More resources will follow, until > hopefully most or all vserver and openvz functionality can be implemented > by controlling resource namespaces from userspace. > > Previous utsname submissions placed a pointer to the utsname namespace > straight in the task_struct. This patchset (and the last one) moves > it and the filesystem namespace pointer into struct nsproxy, which is > shared by processes sharing all namespaces. The intent is to keep > the taskstruct smaller as the number of namespaces grows.
Previously you mentioned: > BTW - a first set of comparison results showed nsproxy to have better > dbench and tbench throughput, and worse kernbench performance. Which > may make sense given that nsproxy results in lower memory usage but > likely increased cache misses due to extra pointer dereference.
Is this still true? Or did our final reference counting tweak fix the kernbench numbers?
I just want to be certain that we don't add an optimization, that reduces performance.
> Changes: > - the reference count on fs namespace and uts namespace now > refers to the number of nsproxies pointing to it > - some consolidation of namespace cloning and exit code to > clean up kernel/{fork,exit}.c > - passed ltp and ltpstress on smp power, x86, and x86-64 > boxes.
Nice.
Eric
- 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/
| |