On Tue, Apr 03, 2007 at 08:45:37AM -0700, Paul Menage wrote: > Whilst I've got no objection in general to using nsproxy rather than > the container_group object that I introduced in my latest patches, I > think that Vatsa's approach of losing the general container object is > flawed, since it loses any kind of per-group generic state (e.g. "this > container is being deleted")
I think I should post the updated version what I have soon. It handles the "container/task group being deleted" case well, by setting task/ns_proxy->count = 0. The only problem I need to resolve is notify_on_release support (and also I haven't looked at the resource conters patches yet). > and last time I saw it, I think it would > tend to lose processes so that they didn't show up in any directory in > the container fs. I think these are fixed in the latest version I have. Will send out to you later this week (as soon as I drag myself off a higher prio task!). -- 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
