[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <20070726111326.873f7b0a.akpm@linux-foundation.org>
Date: Thu, 26 Jul 2007 11:13:26 -0700
From: Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>
To: "Michael Chang" <thenewme91@...il.com>
Cc: "Ray Lee" <ray-lk@...rabbit.org>,
"Nick Piggin" <nickpiggin@...oo.com.au>,
"Eric St-Laurent" <ericstl34@...patico.ca>,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, "ck list" <ck@....kolivas.org>,
linux-mm@...ck.org, "Paul Jackson" <pj@....com>,
"Jesper Juhl" <jesper.juhl@...il.com>,
"Rene Herman" <rene.herman@...il.com>
Subject: Re: [ck] Re: -mm merge plans for 2.6.23
On Thu, 26 Jul 2007 10:19:06 -0400 "Michael Chang" <thenewme91@...il.com> wrote:
> > All this would end up needing runtime configurability and tweakability and
> > customisability. All standard fare for userspace stuff - much easier than
> > patching the kernel.
>
> Maybe I'm missing something here, but if the problem is resource
> allocation when switching from state A to state B, and from B to C,
> etc.; wouldn't it be a bad thing if state B happened to be (in the
> future) this state-shifting userspace daemon of which you speak? (Or
> is that likely to be impossible/unlikely for some other reason which
> alludes me at the moment?)
Well. I was assuming that the daemon wouldn't be a great memory pig.
I suspect it would do practically zero IO and would use little memory.
It could even be mlocked, but I doubt if that would be needed.
-
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