Paul Menage wrote: > On Mon, Oct 6, 2008 at 1:03 AM, Andrea Righi <righi.andrea@xxxxxxxxx> 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 -- Balbir _______________________________________________ Containers mailing list Containers@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://lists.linux-foundation.org/mailman/listinfo/containers