Re: [ckrm-tech] [RFC][PATCH 4/7] UBC: syscalls (user interface)
From: Kirill Korotaev
Date: Thu Aug 17 2006 - 10:00:10 EST
Srivatsa Vaddagiri wrote:
On Wed, Aug 16, 2006 at 07:39:43PM +0400, Kirill Korotaev wrote:I think this can be added when needed, no?
+ * The setbeanlimit syscall
+asmlinkage long sys_setublimit(uid_t uid, unsigned long resource,
+ unsigned long *limits)
+ spin_lock_irqsave(&ub->ub_lock, flags);
+ ub->ub_parms[resource].barrier = new_limits;
+ ub->ub_parms[resource].limit = new_limits;
Would it be usefull to notify the "resource" controller about this
change in limits? For ex: in case of the CPU controller I wrote
(http://lkml.org/lkml/2006/8/4/9), I was finding it usefull to recv
notification of changes to these limits, so that internal structures
(which are kept per-task-group) can be updated.
See no much reason to add notifications which are not used yet.
Please, keep in mind. This patch set can be extended in infinite number
of ways. But!!! It contains only the required minimal functionality.
When we are to add code requiring to know about limit changes or fails
or whatever we can always extend it accordingly.
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/