Re: [PATCH 0/2] resource control file system - aka containers on top of nsproxy!

[Paul Menage]

On 3/7/07, Serge E. Hallyn <serue@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> All that being said, if it were going to save space without overly
> complicating things I'm actually not opposed to using nsproxy, but it

If space-saving is the main issue, then the latest version of my
containers patches uses just a single pointer in the task_struct, and
all tasks in the same set of containers (across all hierarchies) will
share a single container_group object, which holds the actual pointers
to container state.

Effectively, container_group is to container as nsproxy is to namespace.

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/