| Re: [ckrm-tech] [patch00/05]: Containers(V2)- Introduction [message #6720] |
Thu, 21 September 2006 21:59  |
Paul Jackson
Messages: 157
Registered: February 2006
|
Senior Member |
|
|
Paul wrote:
> But, there's no reason that the OpenVZ resource control mechanisms
> couldn't be hooked into a generic process container mechanism along
> with cpusets and RG.
Can the generic container avoid performance bottlenecks due to locks
or other hot cache lines on the main code paths for fork, exit, page
allocation and task scheduling?
--
I won't rest till it's the best ...
Programmer, Linux Scalability
Paul Jackson <pj@sgi.com> 1.925.600.0401
|
|
|
|
| Re: [ckrm-tech] [patch00/05]: Containers(V2)- Introduction [message #6752 is a reply to message #6720] |
Thu, 21 September 2006 22:07  |
Paul Menage
Messages: 642
Registered: September 2006
|
Senior Member |
|
|
On 9/21/06, Paul Jackson <pj@sgi.com> wrote:
>
> Can the generic container avoid performance bottlenecks due to locks
> or other hot cache lines on the main code paths for fork, exit, page
> allocation and task scheduling?
Page allocation and task scheduling are resource controller issues,
not generic process container issues. The generic process containers
would have essentially the same overheads for fork/exit that cpusets
have currently.
Paul
|
|
|
|
OpenVZ Forum
Members
Search
Help
Register
Login
Home
