[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20111220145654.GA26881@oksana.dev.rtsoft.ru>
Date: Tue, 20 Dec 2011 18:56:54 +0400
From: Anton Vorontsov <anton.vorontsov@...aro.org>
To: David Rientjes <rientjes@...gle.com>
Cc: Michal Hocko <mhocko@...e.cz>,
KOSAKI Motohiro <kosaki.motohiro@...fujitsu.com>,
Arve Hjønnevåg <arve@...roid.com>,
Rik van Riel <riel@...hat.com>, Pavel Machek <pavel@....cz>,
Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...e.de>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
John Stultz <john.stultz@...aro.org>, linux-mm@...ck.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, Johannes Weiner <hannes@...xchg.org>,
KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki <kamezawa.hiroyu@...fujitsu.com>
Subject: Re: Android low memory killer vs. memory pressure notifications
On Mon, Dec 19, 2011 at 11:12:09AM -0800, David Rientjes wrote:
> On Mon, 19 Dec 2011, Michal Hocko wrote:
>
> > page_cgroup is 16B per page and with the current Johannes' memcg
> > naturalization work (in the mmotm tree) we are down to 8B per page (we
> > got rid of lru). Kamezawa has some patches to get rid of the flags so we
> > will be down to 4B per page on 32b. Is this still too much?
> > I would be really careful about a yet another lowmem notification
> > mechanism.
> >
>
> There was always general interest in a low memory notification mechanism
> even prior to memcg, see http://lwn.net/Articles/268732/ from Marcelo and
> KOSAKI-san. The desire is not only to avoid the metadata overhead of
> memcg, but also to avoid cgroups entirely.
Hm, assuming that metadata is no longer an issue, why do you think avoiding
cgroups would be a good idea?
Thanks,
--
Anton Vorontsov
Email: cbouatmailru@...il.com
--
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