linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 10/14] Add /sys trigger for per-node memory compaction

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-Id: <20100406175601.b131e9d2.akpm@linux-foundation.org>
Date:	Tue, 6 Apr 2010 17:56:01 -0400
From:	Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>
To:	KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki <kamezawa.hiroyu@...fujitsu.com>
Cc:	Mel Gorman <mel@....ul.ie>, Andrea Arcangeli <aarcange@...hat.com>,
	Christoph Lameter <cl@...ux-foundation.org>,
	Adam Litke <agl@...ibm.com>, Avi Kivity <avi@...hat.com>,
	David Rientjes <rientjes@...gle.com>,
	Minchan Kim <minchan.kim@...il.com>,
	KOSAKI Motohiro <kosaki.motohiro@...fujitsu.com>,
	Rik van Riel <riel@...hat.com>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	linux-mm@...ck.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 10/14] Add /sys trigger for per-node memory compaction

On Wed, 7 Apr 2010 09:31:48 +0900 KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki <kamezawa.hiroyu@...fujitsu.com> wrote:

> A cgroup which controls placement of memory is cpuset.

err, yes, that.

> One idea is per cpuset. But per-node seems ok.

Which is superior?

Which maps best onto the way systems are used (and onto ways in which
we _intend_ that systems be used)?

Is the physical node really the best unit-of-administration?  And is
direct access to physical nodes the best means by which admins will
manage things?
--
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/