[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <4EEF6532.3090201@redhat.com>
Date: Mon, 19 Dec 2011 11:24:18 -0500
From: Rik van Riel <riel@...hat.com>
To: KOSAKI Motohiro <kosaki.motohiro@...il.com>
CC: Alan Cox <alan@...rguk.ukuu.org.uk>,
Anton Vorontsov <anton.vorontsov@...aro.org>,
KOSAKI Motohiro <kosaki.motohiro@...fujitsu.com>,
Arve Hjønnevåg
<arve@...roid.com>, Pavel Machek <pavel@....cz>,
Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...e.de>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
David Rientjes <rientjes@...gle.com>,
Michal Hocko <mhocko@...e.cz>,
John Stultz <john.stultz@...aro.org>, linux-mm@...ck.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: Android low memory killer vs. memory pressure notifications
On 12/19/2011 11:16 AM, KOSAKI Motohiro wrote:
> (12/19/11 5:39 AM), Alan Cox wrote:
>>> The main downside of this approach is that mem_cg needs 20 bytes per
>>> page (on a 32 bit machine). So on a 32 bit machine with 4K pages
>>> that's approx. 0.5% of RAM, or, in other words, 5MB on a 1GB machine.
>>
>> The obvious question would be why? Would fixing memcg make more sense ?
>
> Just historical reason. Initial memcg implement by IBM was just crap.
And the reason for that, I suspect, is that the "proper"
implementation changes the VM by so much that it would
never have been merged in the first place...
--
All rights reversed
--
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