[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <4EF144D1.2020807@am.sony.com>
Date: Tue, 20 Dec 2011 18:30:41 -0800
From: Frank Rowand <frank.rowand@...sony.com>
To: Anton Vorontsov <anton.vorontsov@...aro.org>
CC: "Rowand, Frank" <Frank_Rowand@...yusa.com>,
David Rientjes <rientjes@...gle.com>,
KOSAKI Motohiro <kosaki.motohiro@...fujitsu.com>,
Michal Hocko <mhocko@...e.cz>,
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-mm@...ck.org>,
"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Johannes Weiner <hannes@...xchg.org>,
KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki <kamezawa.hiroyu@...fujitsu.com>,
Alan Cox <alan@...rguk.ukuu.org.uk>,
"tbird20d@...il.com" <tbird20d@...il.com>
Subject: Re: Android low memory killer vs. memory pressure notifications
On 12/20/11 18:07, Anton Vorontsov wrote:
> On Tue, Dec 20, 2011 at 05:14:18PM -0800, Frank Rowand wrote:
< snip >
>> And for embedded and for real-time, some of us do not want cgroups to be
>> a mandatory thing. We want it to remain configurable. My personal
>> interest is in keeping the latency of certain critical paths (especially
>> in the scheduler) short and consistent.
>
> Much thanks for your input! That would be quite strong argument for going
> with /dev/mem_notify approach. Do you have any specific numbers how cgroups
> makes scheduler latencies worse?
Sorry, I don't have specific numbers. And the numbers would be workload
specific anyway.
-Frank
--
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