[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
This patch implements the BeanCounter resource control abstraction
over generic process containers. It contains the beancounter core
code, plus the numfiles resource counter. It doesn't currently contain
any of the memory tracking code or the code for switching
After
cat /proc/self/pagemap
BUG: sleeping function called from invalid context at include/asm/uaccess.h:453
in_atomic():1, irqs_disabled():0
1 lock held by cat/14183:
#0: (mm-mmap_sem){}, at: [c017d17b] pagemap_read+0x11f/0x21b
[c01b7bc7] copy_to_user+0x37/0x4c
[c017cf92]
Adds RSS accounting and control within a container.
Major change: current scanner code reuse.
Tasks and files accounting is not included as these containers
are simple enough to be implemented later.
Based on top of Paul Menage's container subsystem v8.
Note, that only first three patches from
Introduce generic structures and routines for resource accounting.
Each resource accounting container is supposed to aggregate it,
container_subsystem_state and its resource-specific members within.
diff -upr linux-2.6.20.orig/include/linux/res_counter.h
Naturally mm_struct determines the resource consumer in memory
accounting. So each mm_struct should have a pointer on container
it belongs to. When a new task is created its mm_struct is
assigned to the container this task belongs to.
diff -upr linux-2.6.20.orig/include/linux/sched.h
Struct scan_control now carries:
* the RSS container to free pages in;
* pointer to an isolate_pages() function to isolate
pages needed for the reclamation.
diff -upr linux-2.6.20.orig/mm/vmscan.c linux-2.6.20-2/mm/vmscan.c
--- linux-2.6.20.orig/mm/vmscan.c 2007-03-06 19:09:50.0
Implement try_to_free_pages_in_container() to free the
pages in container that has run out of memory.
The scan_control-isolate_pages() function isolates the
container pages only.
diff -upr linux-2.6.20.orig/include/linux/swap.h
linux-2.6.20-2/include/linux/swap.h
---
Quoting Miklos Szeredi ([EMAIL PROTECTED]):
This patchset adds support for keeping mount ownership information in
the kernel, and allow unprivileged mount(2) and umount(2) in certain
cases.
No replies, huh?
All we need is a comment from Andrew, and the replies come flooding in ;)
*ugh* /me no like.
The basic premises seems to be that we can track page owners perfectly
(although this patch set does not yet do so), through get/release
operations (on _mapcount).
This is simply not true for unmapped pagecache pages. Those receive no
'release' event; (the usage by
Quoting Miklos Szeredi ([EMAIL PROTECTED]):
One thing that is missing from this series is the ability to restrict
user mounts to private namespaces. The reason is that private
namespaces have still not gained the momentum and support needed for
painless user experience. So
On Fri, Apr 06, 2007 at 04:32:27PM -0700, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
This patch implements the BeanCounter resource control abstraction
over generic process containers. It contains the beancounter core
code, plus the numfiles resource counter. It doesn't currently contain
any of the memory
Patrick McHardy wrote:
It would be nice if someone would finally come up with a generic
interface based on netlink (RTM_NEWLINK) instead of adding yet
another couple of homegrown interfaces.
My preference is for ioctls, procfs, or similar that does not
require extra libraries. Ethtool is an
Ram Pai wrote:
It is in FC6. I dont know the status off upstream util-linux. I did
submit the patch many times to Adrian Bunk (the then util-linux
maintainer) and got no response. I have not pushed the patches to the
new maintainer(Karel Zak?) though.
Well, do that, then :)
Seriously.
From: Ben Greear [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Mon, 09 Apr 2007 11:14:52 -0700
Patrick McHardy wrote:
It would be nice if someone would finally come up with a generic
interface based on netlink (RTM_NEWLINK) instead of adding yet
another couple of homegrown interfaces.
My preference is for
From: Patrick McHardy [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Mon, 09 Apr 2007 18:58:13 +0200
It would be nice if someone would finally come up with a generic
interface based on netlink (RTM_NEWLINK) instead of adding yet
another couple of homegrown interfaces.
I absolutely agree, using these ioctls and
Eric W. Biederman wrote:
Nor have I seen a rigorous adherence to all new network configuration
using netlink. The wireless code doesn't even seem to really try.
Not true:
commit 711e2c33ac9221a419a9e28d05dd78a6a9c5fd4d
Author: Jean Tourrilhes [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Wed Feb 22 15:10:56
Johannes Berg wrote:
On Mon, 2007-04-09 at 22:11 +0200, Patrick McHardy wrote:
Thats why I suggested that we should create one, ideally before adding
more sysfs/proc/ioctl/... based interfaces, which we'll have a hard time
getting rid of again.
But then how would we configure initial
17 matches
Mail list logo
