OpenVZ Forum: Devel » [PATCH 1/4] Virtualization/containers: introduction

Home » Mailing lists » Devel » [PATCH 1/4] Virtualization/containers: introduction

Show: Today's Messages :: Show Polls :: Message Navigator
E-mail to friend

Re: [PATCH 1/4] Virtualization/containers: introduction [message #1425 is a reply to message #1411]

Wed, 08 February 2006 14:13

Hubertus Franke
Messages: 16
Registered: February 2006

Junior Member

Eric W. Biederman wrote:
> Hubertus Franke <frankeh@watson.ibm.com> writes:
>
>>Agreed.. here are some issued we learned from other projects that had
>>similar interception points.
>>
>>Having a central umbrella object (let's stick to the name container)
>>is useful, but being the only object through which every access has to
>>pass may have drawbacks..
>>
>>task->container->pspace->pidmap[offset].page implies potential
>>cachemisses etc.
>>
>>If overhead becomes too large, then we can stick (cache) the pointer
>>additionally in the task struct. But ofcourse that should be carefully
>>examined on a per subsystem base...
>
>
> Ok. After talking with the vserver guys on IRC. I think grasp the
> importance. The key feature is to have a place to put limits and the
> like for your entire container. Look at all of the non-signal stuff
> in struct signal for an example. The nested namespaces seem to
> be just an implementation detail.
>
> For OpenVZ having the other namespaces nested may have some
> importance. I haven't gotten their yet.
>
> The task->container->pspace->.... thing feels very awkward to me,
> and feels like it increases our chance getting a cache miss.
>
> So I support the concept of a place to put all of the odd little
> things like rlimits for containers. But I would like to flatten
> it in the task_struct if we can.
>

My point was to mainly identify the performance culprits and provide
an direct access to those "namespaces" for performance reasons.
So we all agreed on that we need to do that..

Question now (see other's note as well), should we provide
a pointer to each and every namespace in struct task.
Seem rather wasteful to me as certain path/namespaces are not
exercise heavily.

Having one object "struct container" that still embodies all
namespace still seems a reasonable idea.
Otherwise identifying the respective namespace of subsystems will
have to go through container->init->subsys_namespace or similar.
Not necessarily bad either..

-- Hubertus

Report message to a moderator

[Message index]

		[PATCH 1/4] Virtualization/containers: introduction By: Kirill Korotaev on Mon, 06 February 2006 21:55
		[PATCH 2/4] Virtualization/containers: CONFIG_CONTAINER By: Kirill Korotaev on Mon, 06 February 2006 22:10
		[PATCH 3/4] Virtualization/containers: UID hash By: Kirill Korotaev on Mon, 06 February 2006 22:15
		[PATCH 4/4] Virtualization/containers: uts name By: Kirill Korotaev on Mon, 06 February 2006 22:20
		Re: [PATCH 1/4] Virtualization/containers: introduction By: Dave Hansen on Mon, 06 February 2006 23:00
		Re: [PATCH 1/4] Virtualization/containers: introduction By: dev on Tue, 07 February 2006 12:22
		Re: [PATCH 1/4] Virtualization/containers: introduction By: ebiederm on Tue, 07 February 2006 03:34
		Re: [PATCH 1/4] Virtualization/containers: introduction By: Rik van Riel on Tue, 07 February 2006 03:40
		Re: [PATCH 1/4] Virtualization/containers: introduction By: Sam Vilain on Tue, 07 February 2006 06:30
		Re: [PATCH 1/4] Virtualization/containers: introduction By: dev on Tue, 07 February 2006 11:49
		Re: [PATCH 1/4] Virtualization/containers: introduction By: ebiederm on Tue, 07 February 2006 14:31
		Re: [PATCH 1/4] Virtualization/containers: introduction By: ebiederm on Tue, 07 February 2006 15:42
		Re: [PATCH 1/4] Virtualization/containers: introduction By: dev on Tue, 07 February 2006 16:16
		Re: [PATCH 1/4] Virtualization/containers: introduction By: ebiederm on Tue, 07 February 2006 17:20
		Re: [PATCH 1/4] Virtualization/containers: introduction By: Sam Vilain on Tue, 07 February 2006 22:43
		Re: [PATCH 1/4] Virtualization/containers: introduction By: Hubertus Franke on Tue, 07 February 2006 16:57
		Re: [PATCH 1/4] Virtualization/containers: introduction By: serue on Tue, 07 February 2006 20:19
		Re: [PATCH 1/4] Virtualization/containers: introduction By: Hubertus Franke on Tue, 07 February 2006 20:46
		Re: [PATCH 1/4] Virtualization/containers: introduction By: ebiederm on Tue, 07 February 2006 22:00
		Re: [PATCH 1/4] Virtualization/containers: introduction By: Hubertus Franke on Tue, 07 February 2006 22:19
		The issues for agreeing on a virtualization/namespaces implementation. By: ebiederm on Tue, 07 February 2006 22:06
		Re: The issues for agreeing on a virtualization/namespaces implementation. By: Hubertus Franke on Tue, 07 February 2006 23:35
		Re: The issues for agreeing on a virtualization/namespaces implementation. By: Alexey Kuznetsov on Wed, 08 February 2006 00:43
		Re: The issues for agreeing on a virtualization/namespaces implementation. By: ebiederm on Wed, 08 February 2006 02:49
		Re: The issues for agreeing on a virtualization/namespaces implementation. By: serue on Wed, 08 February 2006 03:36
		Re: The issues for agreeing on a virtualization/namespaces implementation. By: ebiederm on Wed, 08 February 2006 05:23
		Re: The issues for agreeing on a virtualization/namespaces implementation. By: Hubertus Franke on Wed, 08 February 2006 14:40
		Re: The issues for agreeing on a virtualization/namespaces implementation. By: ebiederm on Wed, 08 February 2006 17:46
		Re: The issues for agreeing on a virtualization/namespaces implementation. By: ebiederm on Wed, 08 February 2006 22:28
		Re: The issues for agreeing on a virtualization/namespaces implementation. By: serue on Wed, 08 February 2006 15:17
		Re: The issues for agreeing on a virtualization/namespaces implementation. By: serue on Wed, 08 February 2006 18:03
		Re: The issues for agreeing on a virtualization/namespaces implementation. By: dev on Mon, 20 February 2006 12:08
		Re: The issues for agreeing on a virtualization/namespaces implementation. By: Herbert Poetzl on Mon, 20 February 2006 12:40
		Re: The issues for agreeing on a virtualization/namespaces implementation. By: dev on Mon, 20 February 2006 14:25
		Re: The issues for agreeing on a virtualization/namespaces implementation. By: Herbert Poetzl on Mon, 20 February 2006 15:16
		Re: The issues for agreeing on a virtualization/namespaces implementation. By: Andi Kleen on Mon, 20 February 2006 15:17
		Re: The issues for agreeing on a virtualization/namespaces implementation. By: ebiederm on Wed, 08 February 2006 03:52
		Re: The issues for agreeing on a virtualization/namespaces implementation. By: Herbert Poetzl on Wed, 08 February 2006 04:37
		Re: The issues for agreeing on a virtualization/namespaces implementation. By: ebiederm on Wed, 08 February 2006 04:46
		Re: The issues for agreeing on a virtualization/namespaces implementation. By: Herbert Poetzl on Wed, 08 February 2006 04:56
		Re: The issues for agreeing on a virtualization/namespaces implementation. By: serue on Wed, 08 February 2006 14:38
		Re: The issues for agreeing on a virtualization/namespaces implementation. By: Hubertus Franke on Wed, 08 February 2006 14:51
		Re: The issues for agreeing on a virtualization/namespaces implementation. By: dev on Wed, 08 February 2006 15:34
		Re: The issues for agreeing on a virtualization/namespaces implementation. By: Hubertus Franke on Wed, 08 February 2006 15:57
		Re: The issues for agreeing on a virtualization/namespaces implementation. By: Herbert Poetzl on Wed, 08 February 2006 19:02
		Re: The issues for agreeing on a virtualization/namespaces implementation. By: ebiederm on Wed, 08 February 2006 16:48
		Re: The issues for agreeing on a virtualization/namespaces implementation. By: Hubertus Franke on Wed, 08 February 2006 18:31
		Re: The issues for agreeing on a virtualization/namespaces implementation. By: Dave Hansen on Wed, 08 February 2006 20:21
		Re: The issues for agreeing on a virtualization/namespaces implementation. By: serue on Wed, 08 February 2006 21:22
		Re: The issues for agreeing on a virtualization/namespaces implementation. By: ebiederm on Thu, 09 February 2006 05:41
		Re: The issues for agreeing on a virtualization/namespaces implementation. By: Kyle Moffett on Thu, 09 February 2006 04:45
		Re: The issues for agreeing on a virtualization/namespaces implementation. By: ebiederm on Thu, 09 February 2006 22:25
		Re: [PATCH 1/4] Virtualization/containers: introduction By: Sam Vilain on Tue, 07 February 2006 22:58
		Re: [PATCH 1/4] Virtualization/containers: introduction By: Hubertus Franke on Tue, 07 February 2006 23:18
		Re: [PATCH 1/4] Virtualization/containers: introduction By: ebiederm on Wed, 08 February 2006 05:03
		Re: [PATCH 1/4] Virtualization/containers: introduction By: Hubertus Franke on Wed, 08 February 2006 14:13
		Re: [PATCH 1/4] Virtualization/containers: introduction By: dev on Wed, 08 February 2006 15:42
		Re: [PATCH 1/4] Virtualization/containers: introduction By: ebiederm on Wed, 08 February 2006 16:39
		Re: [PATCH 1/4] Virtualization/containers: introduction By: Kevin Fox on Wed, 08 February 2006 02:08
		Re: [PATCH 1/4] Virtualization/containers: introduction By: dev on Wed, 08 February 2006 15:35
		Re: [PATCH 1/4] Virtualization/containers: introduction By: ebiederm on Wed, 08 February 2006 17:16
		Re: [PATCH 1/4] Virtualization/containers: introduction By: Dave Hansen on Wed, 08 February 2006 20:43
		Re: [PATCH 1/4] Virtualization/containers: introduction By: ebiederm on Wed, 08 February 2006 21:04
		Re: [PATCH 1/4] Virtualization/containers: introduction By: dev on Tue, 07 February 2006 12:12
		Re: [PATCH 1/4] Virtualization/containers: introduction By: ebiederm on Tue, 07 February 2006 14:06
		Re: [PATCH 1/4] Virtualization/containers: introduction By: Rik van Riel on Tue, 07 February 2006 14:52
		Re: [PATCH 1/4] Virtualization/containers: introduction By: ebiederm on Tue, 07 February 2006 15:13
		Re: [PATCH 1/4] Virtualization/containers: introduction By: Sam Vilain on Wed, 08 February 2006 01:16
		Re: [PATCH 1/4] Virtualization/containers: introduction By: Paul Jackson on Wed, 08 February 2006 04:21
		Re: [PATCH 1/4] Virtualization/containers: introduction By: ebiederm on Thu, 09 February 2006 00:24
		Re: [PATCH 1/4] Virtualization/containers: introduction By: Jeff Dike on Thu, 09 February 2006 02:18
		Re: [PATCH 1/4] Virtualization/containers: introduction By: ebiederm on Thu, 09 February 2006 03:16
		Re: [PATCH 1/4] Virtualization/containers: introduction By: Hubertus Franke on Thu, 09 February 2006 16:38
		Re: [PATCH 1/4] Virtualization/containers: introduction By: Jeff Dike on Thu, 09 February 2006 17:47
		Re: [PATCH 1/4] Virtualization/containers: introduction By: Sam Vilain on Thu, 09 February 2006 22:09
		Re: [PATCH 1/4] Virtualization/containers: introduction By: ebiederm on Thu, 09 February 2006 21:56

Previous Topic:	Versioning issue on vzquota-3.0.0-2
Next Topic:	[NET][IA64] Unaligned access in sk_run_filter

Goto Forum:

-=] Back to Top [=-

[ Syndicate this forum (XML) ] [

] [

]

Current Time: Tue Aug 05 04:59:51 GMT 2025

Total time taken to generate the page: 2.20781 seconds