On Fri, Mar 09, 2007 at 10:04:30PM +0530, Srivatsa Vaddagiri wrote: > 2. Regarding space savings, if 100 tasks are in a container (I dont know > what is a typical number) -and- lets say that all tasks are to share > the same resource allocation (which seems to be natural), then having > a 'struct container_group *' pointer in each task_struct seems to be not > very efficient (simply because we dont need that task-level granularity of > managing resource allocation).
Note that this 'struct container_group *' pointer is in addition to the 'struct nsproxy *' pointer already in task_struct. If the set of tasks over which resorce control is applied is typically the same set of tasks which share the same 'struct nsproxy *' pointer, then IMHO 'struct container_group *' in each task_struct is not very optimal. -- Regards, vatsa ------------------------------------------------------------------------- Take Surveys. Earn Cash. Influence the Future of IT Join SourceForge.net's Techsay panel and you'll get the chance to share your opinions on IT & business topics through brief surveys-and earn cash http://www.techsay.com/default.php?page=join.php&p=sourceforge&CID=DEVDEV _______________________________________________ ckrm-tech mailing list https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/ckrm-tech
