Re: [RFC][2/3] Account and control virtual address space allocations

!MAILaRCHIVE_VOTE_RePLACE
Previous message: [thread] [date] [author]
Next message: [thread] [date] [author]
To: <balbir@...>
Cc: <linux-mm@...>, Hugh Dickins <hugh@...>, Sudhir Kumar <skumar@...>, YAMAMOTO Takashi <yamamoto@...>, Paul Menage <menage@...>, <lizf@...>, <linux-kernel@...>, <taka@...>, David Rientjes <rientjes@...>, Pavel Emelianov <xemul@...>, Andrew Morton <akpm@...>, KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki <kamezawa.hiroyu@...>
Date: Tuesday, March 18, 2008 - 1:11 pm

On Tue, 2008-03-18 at 06:44 +0530, Balbir Singh wrote: 

Yeah, but if VM_ACCOUNT isn't set, do you really want the controller
accounting for them?  It's there for a reason. :)

The shmem_acct_size() helpers look good.  I wonder if we should be using
that kind of things more generically.


Could you explain why "we" care about it and why it isn't accounted for
now?

-- Dave

--
Previous message: [thread] [date] [author]
Next message: [thread] [date] [author]

Messages in current thread:
[RFC][0/3] Virtual address space control for cgroups, Balbir Singh, (Sun Mar 16, 1:29 pm)
Re: [RFC][0/3] Virtual address space control for cgroups, Balbir Singh, (Sun Mar 16, 11:12 pm)
Re: [RFC][0/3] Virtual address space control for cgroups, Balbir Singh, (Mon Mar 17, 11:15 am)
Re: [RFC][2/3] Account and control virtual address space all..., Dave Hansen, (Tue Mar 18, 1:11 pm)