Kaigai Kohei <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > The common agreement for the method of dealing with process aggregation > has not been constructed yet, I understood. And, we will not able to > integrate each process aggregation model because of its diverseness. > > For example, a process which belong to JOB-A must not belong any other > 'JOB-X' in CSA-model. But, In ELSA-model, a process in BANK-B can > concurrently > belong to BANK-B1 which is a child of BANK-B. > > And, there are other defferences: > Whether a process not to belong to any process-aggregation is permitted or > not ? > Whether a process-aggregation should be inherited to child process or not ? > (There is possibility not to be inherited in a rule-based process > aggregation like CKRM) > > Some process-aggregation model have own philosophy and implemantation, > so it's hard to integrate. Thus, I think that common 'fork/exec/exit' event > handling > framework to implement any kinds of process-aggregation.
We really want to avoid doing such stuff in-kernel if at all possible, of course. Is it not possible to implement the fork/exec/exit notifications to userspace so that a daemon can track the process relationships and perform aggregation based upon individual tasks' accounting? That's what one of the accounting systems is proposing doing, I believe. (In fact, why do we even need the notifications? /bin/ps can work this stuff out). - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
