[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <CAOJsxLEtuzEYVUtukrA1JeJnuOJ6OsOHOj=j2gs=-0NHYVPzLQ@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 17 Jan 2012 15:58:48 +0200
From: Pekka Enberg <penberg@...nel.org>
To: leonid.moiseichuk@...ia.com
Cc: linux-mm@...ck.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
cesarb@...arb.net, kamezawa.hiroyu@...fujitsu.com,
emunson@...bm.net, aarcange@...hat.com, riel@...hat.com,
mel@....ul.ie, rientjes@...gle.com, dima@...roid.com,
gregkh@...e.de, rebecca@...roid.com, san@...gle.com,
akpm@...ux-foundation.org, vesa.jaaskelainen@...ia.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 2/2] Memory notification pseudo-device module
On Tue, Jan 17, 2012 at 3:45 PM, <leonid.moiseichuk@...ia.com> wrote:
> 3. maybe someone needs similar solution, keep it internally = kill it. Now
> module looks pretty simple for me and maintainable. Plus one small issue
> fixed for swapinfo()
If you're serious about making this a generic thing, it must live in
mm/mem_notify.c. No ifs or buts about it.
I'm also not completely convinced we need to put memnotify policy in
the kernel. Why can't we extend Minchan's patch to report the relevant
numbers and let the userspace figure out when pressure is above some
interesting threshold?
Pekka
--
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