Paul Menage wrote:
quoted text
> On Mon, Oct 6, 2008 at 1:03 AM, Andrea Righi <righi.andrea@gmail.com> wrote:
>>> Could you not either:
>>>
>>> - include these two extra fields in res_counter?
>>> - include res_counter as the first field in a res_counter_ratelimit?
>> The second solution would save some space if the "ratelimit" part is not used.
> 
> Having a "policy" field in res_counter seems like it might be reusable
> as something for other non-ratelimited res_counters. And even if it's
> not, the memory overhead of a couple of extra fields in a res_counter
> is trivial compared to the overhead of resource isolation anyway.
> 
> So my first approach to this would be just extend res_counter, and
> then split them apart later if it turns out that they really do need
> mutually incompatible code/handlers.

Yes! I agree

-- 
	Balbir
--
unsubscribe notice
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/