On Wed, 11 Jun 2008 12:03:45 +0900 Daisuke Nishimura <nishimura@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > Or, instead of implementing rollback in kernel, > > > how about making user(or middle ware?) re-echo pid to rollbak > > > on failure? > > > > > > > "If the users does well, the system works in better way" is O.K. > > "If the users doesn't well, the system works in broken way" is very bad. > > > Hum... > > I think users must know what they are doing. > yes. but it's a different problem, - "a user must know what they does." - "a system works without BUG even if the user is crazy." > They must know that moving a process to another group > that doesn't have enough room for it may fail with half state, > if it is the behavior of kernel. > And they should handle the error by themselves, IMHO. > I'm now considering following logic. How do you think ? Assume: move TASK from group:CURR to group:DEST. == move_task(TASK, CURR, DEST) if (DEST's limit is unlimited) moving TASK return success. usage = check_usage_of_task(TASK). /* try to reserve enough room in destionation */ if (try_to_reserve_enough_room(DEST, usage)) { move TASK to DEST and move pages AMAP. /* usage_of_task(TASK) can be changed while we do this. Then, we move AMAP. */ return success; } return failure. == The difficult point will be reservation but can be implemented without complexity. Thanks, -Kame _______________________________________________ Containers mailing list Containers@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://lists.linux-foundation.org/mailman/listinfo/containers