On 10/31/06, Balbir Singh <[email protected]> wrote:
I thought this would be hard to do in general, but with a page --> container mapping that will come as a result of the memory controller, will it still be that hard?
I meant that it's pretty much impossible with the current APIs provided by the kernel. That's why one of the most useful things that a memory controller can provide is accounting and limiting of page cache usage. Paul - 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/
- Follow-Ups:
- Re: [ckrm-tech] RFC: Memory Controller
- From: Balbir Singh <[email protected]>
- Re: [ckrm-tech] RFC: Memory Controller
- References:
- [RFC] Resource Management - Infrastructure choices
- From: Srivatsa Vaddagiri <[email protected]>
- RFC: Memory Controller
- From: Balbir Singh <[email protected]>
- Re: RFC: Memory Controller
- From: "Paul Menage" <[email protected]>
- Re: [ckrm-tech] RFC: Memory Controller
- From: Balbir Singh <[email protected]>
- Re: [ckrm-tech] RFC: Memory Controller
- From: "Paul Menage" <[email protected]>
- Re: [ckrm-tech] RFC: Memory Controller
- From: Balbir Singh <[email protected]>
- Re: [ckrm-tech] RFC: Memory Controller
- From: "Paul Menage" <[email protected]>
- Re: [ckrm-tech] RFC: Memory Controller
- From: Balbir Singh <[email protected]>
- [RFC] Resource Management - Infrastructure choices
- Prev by Date: Re: [ckrm-tech] RFC: Memory Controller
- Next by Date: Re: [RFC, PATCH] dont insert sockets/pipes dentries into dentry_hashtable.
- Previous by thread: Re: [ckrm-tech] RFC: Memory Controller
- Next by thread: Re: [ckrm-tech] RFC: Memory Controller
- Index(es):
 |