Balbir Singh wrote:
quoted text
> Paul Menage wrote:
>> 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

Good! I'll go for this.

Thanks,
-Andrea
--
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/