6,534
edits
Changes
m
# memory reclamation[[Category:UBC]]# moving tasks across beancounters[[Category:Containers]]
Protected "Containers/UBC discussion" ([edit=autoconfirmed] (indefinite) [move=autoconfirmed] (indefinite))
== 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
: xxxIt is still not clear whether we need unified interface.: Having one syscall for setting values for different resources seems OK if leaving alone the meaning of the "value" notion. ; memory reclamation: Pending to be implemented on top of BC. ; 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 be able to touch that number of pages - I think 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?
