OpenVZ Forum


Home » Mailing lists » Devel » [RFC][PATCH 0/7] Resource controllers based on process containers
Re: [RFC][PATCH 6/7] Account for the number of tasks within container [message #10906 is a reply to message #10894] Wed, 07 March 2007 02:00 Go to previous messageGo to previous message
Paul Menage is currently offline  Paul Menage
Messages: 642
Registered: September 2006
Senior Member
Hi Pavel,

On 3/6/07, Pavel Emelianov <xemul@sw.ru> wrote:
> diff -upr linux-2.6.20.orig/include/linux/sched.h linux-2.6.20-0/include/linux/sched.h
> --- linux-2.6.20.orig/include/linux/sched.h 2007-03-06 13:33:28.000000000 +0300
> +++ linux-2.6.20-0/include/linux/sched.h 2007-03-06 13:33:28.000000000 +0300
> @@ -1052,6 +1055,9 @@ struct task_struct {
> #ifdef CONFIG_FAULT_INJECTION
> int make_it_fail;
> #endif
> +#ifdef CONFIG_PROCESS_CONTAINER
> + struct numproc_container *numproc_cnt;
> +#endif
> };

Why do you need a pointer added to task_struct? One of the main points
of the generic containers is to avoid every different subsystem and
resource controller having to add new pointers there.

> +
> + rcu_read_lock();
> + np = numproc_from_cont(task_container(current, &numproc_subsys));
> + css_get_current(&np->css);

There's no need to hold a reference here - by definition, the task's
container can't go away while the task is in it.

Also, shouldn't you have an attach() method to move the count from one
container to another when a task moves?

Paul
 
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Previous Topic: Re: [ckrm-tech] [PATCH 7/7] containers (V7): Container interface to nsproxy subsystem
Next Topic: Linux-VServer example results for sharing vs. separate mappings ...
Goto Forum:
  


Current Time: Wed Aug 07 20:29:48 GMT 2024

Total time taken to generate the page: 0.02946 seconds