lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2006]   [Aug]   [17]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
    /
    Date
    From
    SubjectRe: [ckrm-tech] [RFC][PATCH 2/7] UBC: core (structures, API)
    On Wed, Aug 16, 2006 at 07:37:26PM +0400, Kirill Korotaev wrote:
    > +struct user_beancounter
    > +{
    > + atomic_t ub_refcount;
    > + spinlock_t ub_lock;
    > + uid_t ub_uid;
    > + struct hlist_node hash;
    > +
    > + struct user_beancounter *parent;

    This seems to hint at some heirarchy of ubc? How would that heirarchy be
    used? I cant find anything in the patch which forms this heirarchy
    (basically I dont see any place where beancounter_findcreate() is called
    with non-NULL 2nd arg).

    [snip]

    > +static void init_beancounter_syslimits(struct user_beancounter *ub)
    > +{
    > + int k;
    > +
    > + for (k = 0; k < UB_RESOURCES; k++)
    > + ub->ub_parms[k].barrier = ub->ub_parms[k].limit;

    This sets barrier to 0. Is this value of 0 interpreted differently by
    different controllers? One way to interpret it is "dont allocate any
    resource", other way to interpret it is "don't care - give me what you
    can" (which makes sense for stuff like CPU and network bandwidth).



    --
    Regards,
    vatsa
    -
    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/

    \
     
     \ /
      Last update: 2006-08-17 14:17    [W:2.937 / U:0.456 seconds]
    ©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site