[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <1158775586.28174.27.camel@lappy>
Date: Wed, 20 Sep 2006 20:06:26 +0200
From: Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra@...llo.nl>
To: Christoph Lameter <clameter@....com>
Cc: Rohit Seth <rohitseth@...gle.com>,
Nick Piggin <nickpiggin@...oo.com.au>,
CKRM-Tech <ckrm-tech@...ts.sourceforge.net>, devel@...nvz.org,
linux-kernel <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Linux Memory Management <linux-mm@...ck.org>
Subject: Re: [patch00/05]: Containers(V2)- Introduction
On Wed, 2006-09-20 at 10:52 -0700, Christoph Lameter wrote:
> On Wed, 20 Sep 2006, Rohit Seth wrote:
>
> > Right now the memory handler in this container subsystem is written in
> > such a way that when existing kernel reclaimer kicks in, it will first
> > operate on those (container with pages over the limit) pages first. But
> > in general I like the notion of containerizing the whole reclaim code.
>
> Which comes naturally with cpusets.
How are shared mappings dealt with, are pages charged to the set that
first faults them in?
-
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