From: Alexey Kuznetsov <kuznet@ms2.inr.ac.ru>
To: Dave Hansen <haveblue@us.ibm.com>
Cc: Kirill Korotaev <dev@openvz.org>,
serue@us.ibm.com, arjan@infradead.org, frankeh@watson.ibm.com,
clg@fr.ibm.com, mrmacman_g4@mac.com, alan@lxorguk.ukuu.org.uk,
Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
devel@openvz.org
Subject: Re: [RFC][PATCH 5/7] VPIDs: vpid/pid conversion in VPID enabled case
Date: Fri, 3 Feb 2006 13:52:02 +0300 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20060203105202.GA21819@ms2.inr.ac.ru> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1138899951.29030.30.camel@localhost.localdomain>
Hello!
> This is an interesting approach. Could you elaborate a bit on on why
> you need the two different approaches? What conditions cause the switch
> to the sparse approach?
>
> Also, if you could separate those two approaches out into two different
> patches, it would be much easier to get a grasp about what's going on.
> One of them is just an optimization, right?
Exactly. They are not two different "approaches", it is just a simple
optimization.
In our approach each process has pair of pids: one is global unique identifier
(read, it is real pid from viewpoint of kernel), another is virtual pid.
We just do not want to lose cycles allocating both of them all the time,
so we derive virtual pid from global one, it is automatically "virtually"
unique.
Switch to "sparse" mapping happens _only_ after migration, when a process
must be recreated with the same virtual pid, but with new global pid.
> Did you happen to catch Linus's mail about his preferred approach?
>
> http://marc.theaimsgroup.com/?l=linux-kernel&m=113874154731279&w=2
Of course. Logically, it would be final solution.
VPID approach is pragmatic: it does not modify existing logic, rather
it relies on it. So, it just allows to use virtual pids in a simple
and efficient way, which is enough for all known tasks.
Alexey
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2006-02-03 10:53 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 43+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2006-02-02 15:54 [RFC][PATCH] VPIDs: Virtualization of PIDs (OpenVZ approach) Kirill Korotaev
2006-02-02 16:16 ` [RFC][PATCH 1/7] VPIDs: add VPID config option Kirill Korotaev
2006-02-02 16:21 ` [RFC][PATCH 2/7] VPIDs: pid/vpid conversions Kirill Korotaev
2006-02-08 20:29 ` Eric W. Biederman
2006-02-08 23:53 ` Alexey Kuznetsov
2006-02-09 0:37 ` Eric W. Biederman
2006-02-09 1:11 ` Alexey Kuznetsov
2006-02-09 1:36 ` Eric W. Biederman
2006-02-09 2:51 ` Serge E. Hallyn
2006-02-09 9:55 ` Alexey Kuznetsov
2006-02-09 19:22 ` Eric W. Biederman
2006-02-20 14:57 ` Kirill Korotaev
2006-02-20 16:56 ` Herbert Poetzl
2006-02-21 16:19 ` Kirill Korotaev
2006-02-21 23:17 ` Herbert Poetzl
2006-02-02 16:24 ` [RFC][PATCH 3/7] VPIDs: fork modifications Kirill Korotaev
2006-02-02 20:08 ` Cedric Le Goater
2006-02-02 16:26 ` [RFC][PATCH 4/7] VPIDs: vpid macros in non-VPID case Kirill Korotaev
2006-02-02 16:30 ` [RFC][PATCH 5/7] VPIDs: vpid/pid conversion in VPID enabled case Kirill Korotaev
2006-02-02 17:05 ` Dave Hansen
2006-02-02 19:29 ` Serge E. Hallyn
2006-02-03 10:52 ` Alexey Kuznetsov [this message]
2006-02-03 12:48 ` Cedric Le Goater
2006-02-03 14:02 ` Alexey Kuznetsov
2006-02-03 16:25 ` Dave Hansen
2006-02-06 11:24 ` Alexey Kuznetsov
2006-02-03 17:05 ` Cedric Le Goater
2006-02-06 9:48 ` Alexey Kuznetsov
2006-02-06 14:51 ` Serge E. Hallyn
2006-02-06 15:51 ` Alexey Kuznetsov
2006-02-06 16:24 ` Serge E. Hallyn
2006-02-07 9:46 ` Cedric Le Goater
2006-02-07 11:44 ` Kirill Korotaev
2006-02-07 12:59 ` Cedric Le Goater
2006-02-07 9:15 ` Cedric Le Goater
2006-02-03 14:05 ` Kirill Korotaev
2006-02-03 15:40 ` Cedric Le Goater
2006-02-03 16:28 ` Kirill Korotaev
2006-02-02 16:31 ` [RFC][PATCH 6/7] VPIDs: small proc VPID export Kirill Korotaev
2006-02-02 16:33 ` [RFC][PATCH 7/7] VPIDs: required VPS interface for VPIDs Kirill Korotaev
2006-02-03 3:01 ` [RFC][PATCH] VPIDs: Virtualization of PIDs (OpenVZ approach) Herbert Poetzl
2006-02-03 10:30 ` Kirill Korotaev
2006-02-03 12:45 ` Alexey Kuznetsov
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20060203105202.GA21819@ms2.inr.ac.ru \
--to=kuznet@ms2.inr.ac.ru \
--cc=alan@lxorguk.ukuu.org.uk \
--cc=arjan@infradead.org \
--cc=clg@fr.ibm.com \
--cc=dev@openvz.org \
--cc=devel@openvz.org \
--cc=frankeh@watson.ibm.com \
--cc=haveblue@us.ibm.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mrmacman_g4@mac.com \
--cc=serue@us.ibm.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox
all inboxes | Powered by JetHome®