Re: [PATCH 0/7] containers (V7): Generic Process Containers

[Paul Menage]

On 2/12/07, Paul Jackson <pj@xxxxxxx> wrote:
> You'll have a rough time selling me on the idea that some kernel thread
> should be waking up every few seconds, grabbing system-wide locks, on a
> big honkin NUMA box, for the few times per hour, or less, that a cpuset is
> abandoned.

I think it could be made smarter than that, e.g. have a workqueue task
that's only woken when a refcount does actually reach zero. (I think
that waking a workqueue task is something that can be done without too
much worry about locks)

> Can you explain to me how this intruded on the reference counting?

Essentially, it means that anything that releases a reference count on
a container needs to be able to trigger a call to the release agent.
The reference count is often released at a point when important locks
are held, so you end up having to pass buffers into any function that
might drop a ref count, in order to store a path to a release agent to
be invoked.

In particular, the new container_clone() function can be called during
the task fork path; at which point forking a new release_agent process
would be impossible, or at least nasty. Additionally, if containers
are potentially going to be used for virtual servers, having the
release agent run from a top-level process rather than the process
context that released the refcount sounds like a sane option.

Paul
-
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/