Chris Wright wrote:
* Jay Lan ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
Andrew Morton wrote:
Kaigai Kohei <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
In my understanding, what Andrew Morton said is "If target functionality
can
implement in user space only, then we should not modify the kernel-tree".
fork, exec and exit upcalls sound pretty good to me. As long as
a) they use the same common machinery and
b) they are next-to-zero cost if something is listening on the netlink
socket but no accounting daemon is running.
Question is: is this sufficient for CSA?
Yes, fork, exec, and exit upcalls are sufficient for CSA.
As soon as you want to throttle tasks at the Job level, this would be
insufficient. But, IIRC, that's not one of PAGG/Job/CSA's requirements
right?
PAGG serves more than JOB+CSA.
I am looking into possiblity/feasibility of implementing JOB at
userspace. However, even with JOB as a kernel module, the fork,
exec and exit upcalls would be sufficient to support JOB+CSA.
Thanks,
- jay
thanks,
-chris
-
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/
