[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <47BD1F97.8030202@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
Date: Thu, 21 Feb 2008 12:22:07 +0530
From: Balbir Singh <balbir@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>
To: KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki <kamezawa.hiroyu@...fujitsu.com>
CC: John Stoffel <john@...ffel.org>,
Jan Engelhardt <jengelh@...putergmbh.de>,
Andi Kleen <andi@...stfloor.org>, akpm@...l.org,
torvalds@...l.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-mm@...ck.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] Document huge memory/cache overhead of memory controller
in Kconfig
KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki wrote:
> On Wed, 20 Feb 2008 21:45:13 +0530
> Balbir Singh <balbir@...ux.vnet.ibm.com> wrote:
>
>>> But for computers, limits is an expected and understood term, and for
>>> filesystems it's quotas. So in this case, I *still* think you should
>>> be using the term "Memory Quota Controller" instead. It just makes it
>>> clearer to a larger audience what you mean.
>>>
>> Memory Quota sounds very confusing to me. Usually a quota implies limits, but in
>> a true framework, one can also implement guarantees and shares.
>>
> This "cgroup memory contoller" is called as "Memory Resource Contoller"
> in my office ;)
>
> How about Memory Resouce Contoller ?
That is a good name and believe me or not I was thinking of the same name.
--
Warm Regards,
Balbir Singh
Linux Technology Center
IBM, ISTL
--
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