[<prev] [next>] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <1156128426.21411.41.camel@localhost>
Date: Mon, 21 Aug 2006 11:47:06 +0900
From: Magnus Damm <magnus@...inux.co.jp>
To: Dave Hansen <haveblue@...ibm.com>
Cc: Andrey Savochkin <saw@...ru>, Rik van Riel <riel@...hat.com>,
ckrm-tech@...ts.sourceforge.net, Andi Kleen <ak@...e.de>,
Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Christoph Hellwig <hch@...radead.org>,
Alan Cox <alan@...rguk.ukuu.org.uk>, rohitseth@...gle.com,
hugh@...itas.com, Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>,
Kirill Korotaev <dev@...ru>, devel@...nvz.org,
Pavel Emelianov <xemul@...nvz.org>
Subject: Re: [ckrm-tech] [PATCH 4/7] UBC: syscalls (user interface)
On Fri, 2006-08-18 at 07:45 -0700, Dave Hansen wrote:
> On Fri, 2006-08-18 at 12:08 +0400, Andrey Savochkin wrote:
> >
> > A) Have separate memory management for each container,
> > with separate buddy allocator, lru lists, page replacement mechanism.
> > That implies a considerable overhead, and the main challenge there
> > is sharing of pages between these separate memory managers.
>
> Hold on here for just a sec...
>
> It is quite possible to do memory management aimed at one container
> while that container's memory still participates in the main VM.
>
> There is overhead here, as the LRU scanning mechanisms get less
> efficient, but I'd rather pay a penalty at LRU scanning time than divide
> up the VM, or coarsely start failing allocations.
This could of course be solved with one LRU per container, which is how
the CKRM memory controller implemented things about a year ago.
/ magnus
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists