Paul Menage wrote: >> Using the container name is bad and it led to this stupid argument. >> >> The fundamental unit of what we have merged into the kernel is the >> namespace. The aggregate of all namespaces and everything is the >> container. >> > What are you defining here as "everything"? If you mean "all things > that could be applied to a segregated group of processes such as a > virtual server",
The term "segregated group of processes" is too vague. Segregated for what? What is the kernel supposed to do with this information? > I guess what it comes down to, is why is an aggregation of namespaces > suitable for the name "container", when an aggregation of namespaces > and other resource controllers isn't? > This argument goes away if you just rename these resource groups to resource namespaces. > What do you think might be a better name for the generic process > groups that I'm pushing? As I said, I'm happy to do a simple > search/replace on my code to give a different name if that turned out > to be the gating factor to getting it merged. But I'd be inclined to > leave that decision up to Andrew/Linus. > Did you like the names I came up with in my original reply? - CPUset namespace for CPU partitioning - Resource namespaces: - cpusched namespace for CPU - ulimit namespace for memory - quota namespace for disk space - io namespace for disk activity - etc >> For the case of namespaces I don't see how your code makes things >> better. I do not see a real problem that you are solving. >> > I'm trying to solve the problem that lots of different folks > (including us) are trying to do things that aggregate multiple process > into some kind of constrained group, and are all trying to use > different and incompatible ways of grouping/tracking those processes. > Maybe what's missing is a set of helper macros/functions that assist with writing new namespaces. Perhaps you can give some more examples and we can consider these on a case by case basis. Sam. - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/