On Wed, 2006-08-16 at 12:59 -0700, Dave Hansen wrote:
> On Wed, 2006-08-16 at 12:15 -0700, Rohit Seth wrote:
> > My preference would be to have container (I keep on saying container,
> > but resource beancounter) pointer embeded in task, mm(not sure),
> > address_space and anon_vma structures.
>
> Hmm. If we can embed it in the mm, then we can get there from any given
> anon_vma (or any pte for that matter). Here's a little prototype for
> doing just that:
>
> http://www.sr71.net/patches/2.6.18/2.6.18-rc4-mm1-lxc1/broken-out/modify-lru-walk.patch
>
> See file/anon_page_has_naughty_cpuset(). Anybody see any basic problems
> with doing it that way?
>
> One trick with putting it in an mm is that we don't have a direct
> relationship between processes and mm's. We could also potentially have
> two different threads of a process in two different accounting contexts.
> But, that might be as simple to fix as disallowing things that share mms
> from being in different accounting contexts, unless you unshare the mm.
But anon_vmas could be shared across different processes (with different
mms).
-rohit
-
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/
[Index of Archives]
[Kernel Newbies]
[Netfilter]
[Bugtraq]
[Photo]
[Stuff]
[Gimp]
[Yosemite News]
[MIPS Linux]
[ARM Linux]
[Linux Security]
[Linux RAID]
[Video 4 Linux]
[Linux for the blind]
[Linux Resources]
