== Agreement list ==Here we put design features that everyone agree* resources are:** kernel memory** total length of unreclaimable mappings** physical pages* each resource group is independent from each other ; unified interface for mem, cpu, disk I/O: It is still not clear whether we need unified interfacethink you have a great page here… today was my first time coming here.: Having one syscall for setting values for different resources seems OK if leaving alone the meaning of the "value" notion. ; memory reclamation: Pending I just happened to be implemented on top of BCfind it doing a google search. anyway, good post. ; moving tasks across beancounters: Required changes:# saving bc on vma instead of mm# can two threads in a process be in different BC contexts?# changing mm->bc in set_bc_id(). ; what is implied by the term "guarantee"# container will I’ll be able to touch that number of pages - I think bookmarking this one (Hansendc)# container will be able to map that number of pages# container will not be killed unless it touches that number of pages# anything else ; make it possible to charge full user page to its allocator and keep it charged till unmapped ; Consider creating resource groups via the use of aggregation (aggregated BC) == Top Level Design - thoughts on how to accomplish the goal ==# Create a BC per thread group# Associate a group of BC's with an aggregated BC (we can call this a BC resource group)# Enable migration of tasks by charging and un-charging aggregated BC when a BC moves across from one aggregated BC to another# Change set_bcid() to create aggregated BC's instead of BC's == Accounting information ==# Is it possible to merge vm_acct_memory() with the accounting information in beancounters? [[Category:UBC]][[Category:Containers]]for sure.
