[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <CAOJsxLGsjTe13WjY_Q=BLBELwQXOjuwo7PiEKwONHUfR4mQmig@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 25 Oct 2012 09:44:52 +0300
From: Pekka Enberg <penberg@...nel.org>
To: Minchan Kim <minchan@...nel.org>
Cc: Anton Vorontsov <anton.vorontsov@...aro.org>,
Mel Gorman <mgorman@...e.de>,
Leonid Moiseichuk <leonid.moiseichuk@...ia.com>,
KOSAKI Motohiro <kosaki.motohiro@...il.com>,
Bartlomiej Zolnierkiewicz <b.zolnierkie@...sung.com>,
John Stultz <john.stultz@...aro.org>, linux-mm@...ck.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linaro-kernel@...ts.linaro.org,
patches@...aro.org, kernel-team@...roid.com,
linux-man@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [RFC v2 0/2] vmevent: A bit reworked pressure attribute + docs +
man page
On Thu, Oct 25, 2012 at 9:40 AM, Minchan Kim <minchan@...nel.org> wrote:
> Your description doesn't include why we need new vmevent_fd(2).
> Of course, it's very flexible and potential to add new VM knob easily but
> the thing we is about to use now is only VMEVENT_ATTR_PRESSURE.
> Is there any other use cases for swap or free? or potential user?
> Adding vmevent_fd without them is rather overkill.
What ABI would you use instead?
On Thu, Oct 25, 2012 at 9:40 AM, Minchan Kim <minchan@...nel.org> wrote:
> I don't object but we need rationale for adding new system call which should
> be maintained forever once we add it.
Agreed.
--
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