On Mon, Feb 12, 2007 at 12:15:24AM -0800, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> +static int attach_task(struct container *cont, struct task_struct *tsk)
> {
[snip]
> + for_each_subsys(h, ss) {
> + if (ss->can_attach) {
> + retval = ss->can_attach(ss, cont, tsk);
> +
On Mon, Feb 12, 2007 at 12:15:24AM -0800, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
+static int attach_task(struct container *cont, struct task_struct *tsk)
{
[snip]
+ for_each_subsys(h, ss) {
+ if (ss-can_attach) {
+ retval = ss-can_attach(ss, cont, tsk);
+
On Mon, Feb 12, 2007 at 12:15:24AM -0800, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> +static struct container_group *find_container_group(
> + struct container_group *oldcg, struct container *cont)
> +{
> + struct container_group *res;
> + struct container_subsys *ss;
> + int h = cont->hierarchy;
On Mon, Feb 12, 2007 at 12:15:24AM -0800, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
+static struct container_group *find_container_group(
+ struct container_group *oldcg, struct container *cont)
+{
+ struct container_group *res;
+ struct container_subsys *ss;
+ int h = cont-hierarchy;
+
On 2/13/07, Srivatsa Vaddagiri <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Well, we already bump up reference count in fork() w/o grabbing those
mutexes don't we? Also if rmdir() sees container->count to be zero, then
it means no task is attached to the container. How will then a function
like bc_file_charge()
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
This patch removes all cpuset-specific knowlege from the container
system, replacing it with a generic API that can be used by multiple
subsystems. Cpusets is adapted to be a container subsystem.
Signed-off-by: Paul Menage <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Hi, Paul,
This patch
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
This patch removes all cpuset-specific knowlege from the container
system, replacing it with a generic API that can be used by multiple
subsystems. Cpusets is adapted to be a container subsystem.
Signed-off-by: Paul Menage [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Hi, Paul,
This patch
On 2/13/07, Srivatsa Vaddagiri [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Well, we already bump up reference count in fork() w/o grabbing those
mutexes don't we? Also if rmdir() sees container-count to be zero, then
it means no task is attached to the container. How will then a function
like bc_file_charge()
On Mon, Feb 12, 2007 at 10:40:52AM -0800, Paul Menage wrote:
> I did consider that approach at one point. The reason I rejected it
> was that then container->count would no longer even vaguely represent
> the number of processes in a container. Now that we have the
> container_group object, we
On Mon, Feb 12, 2007 at 10:40:52AM -0800, Paul Menage wrote:
I did consider that approach at one point. The reason I rejected it
was that then container-count would no longer even vaguely represent
the number of processes in a container. Now that we have the
container_group object, we have to
On 2/12/07, Srivatsa Vaddagiri <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
On Mon, Feb 12, 2007 at 12:15:24AM -0800, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> +/*
> + * Call css_get() to hold a reference on the container; following a
> + * return of 0, this container subsystem state object is guaranteed
> + * not to be
On 2/12/07, Cedric Le Goater <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> +#include
>
> I did have a problem with this include. On s390 it didn't exist so I've
> just been running without it (with no problems). A quick 'find'
> suggests it only exists on x86_64, so I'd expect failures on all other
> arches.
>> +#include
>
> I did have a problem with this include. On s390 it didn't exist so I've
> just been running without it (with no problems). A quick 'find'
> suggests it only exists on x86_64, so I'd expect failures on all other
> arches.
confirmed on x86 also.
C.
-
To unsubscribe from this
On Mon, Feb 12, 2007 at 12:15:24AM -0800, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> +/*
> + * Call css_get() to hold a reference on the container; following a
> + * return of 0, this container subsystem state object is guaranteed
> + * not to be destroyed until css_put() is called on it. A non-zero
> + * return
+#include asm/proto.h
I did have a problem with this include. On s390 it didn't exist so I've
just been running without it (with no problems). A quick 'find'
suggests it only exists on x86_64, so I'd expect failures on all other
arches.
confirmed on x86 also.
C.
-
To unsubscribe from
On 2/12/07, Cedric Le Goater [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
+#include asm/proto.h
I did have a problem with this include. On s390 it didn't exist so I've
just been running without it (with no problems). A quick 'find'
suggests it only exists on x86_64, so I'd expect failures on all other
On Mon, Feb 12, 2007 at 12:15:24AM -0800, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
+/*
+ * Call css_get() to hold a reference on the container; following a
+ * return of 0, this container subsystem state object is guaranteed
+ * not to be destroyed until css_put() is called on it. A non-zero
+ * return code
On 2/12/07, Srivatsa Vaddagiri [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Mon, Feb 12, 2007 at 12:15:24AM -0800, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
+/*
+ * Call css_get() to hold a reference on the container; following a
+ * return of 0, this container subsystem state object is guaranteed
+ * not to be destroyed
18 matches
Mail list logo
