[lkml]   [2007]   [Mar]   [12]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
    SubjectRe: [ckrm-tech] [PATCH 0/2] resource control file system - aka containers on top of nsproxy!
    On 3/11/07, Paul Jackson <> wrote:
    > My current understanding of Paul Menage's container patch is that it is
    > a useful improvement for some of the metered classes - those that could
    > make good use of a file system like hierarchy for their interface.
    > It probably doesn't benefit all metered classes, as they won't all
    > benefit from a file system like hierarchy, or even have a formal name
    > space, and it doesn't seem to benefit the name space implementation,
    > which happily remains flat.

    Well, what I was aiming at was a generic mechanism that can handle
    "namespaces", "metered classes" and other ways of providing
    per-task-group behaviour. So a system-call API doesn't necessarily
    have the right flexibility to implement the possible different kinds
    of subsystems I envisage.

    For example, one way to easily tie groups of processes to different
    network queues is to have a tag associated with a container, allow
    that to propagate to the socket/skbuf priority field, and then use
    standard Linux traffic control to pick the appropriate outgoing queue
    based on the skbuf's tag.

    This isn't really a namespace, and it isn't really a "metered class".
    It's just a way of associating a piece of data (the network tag) with
    a group of processes.

    With a filesystem-based interface, it's easy to have a file as the
    method of reading/writing the tag; with a system call interface, then
    either the interface is sufficiently generic to allow this kind of
    data association (in which case you're sort of implementing a
    filesystem in the system call) or else you have to shoehorn into an
    unrelated API (e.g. if your system call talks about "resource limits"
    you might end up having to specify the network tag as a "maximum
    limit" since there's no other useful configuration data available).

    As another example, I'd like to have a subsystem that shows me all the
    sockets that processes in the container have opened; again, easy to do
    in a filesystem interface, but hard to fit into a
    resource-meteting-centric or namespace-centric system call API.

    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: 2007-03-12 11:05    [W:0.037 / U:8.752 seconds]
    ©2003-2016 Jasper Spaans. hosted at Digital OceanAdvertise on this site