[lkml]   [2006]   [Sep]   [20]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
    SubjectRe: [patch00/05]: Containers(V2)- Introduction
    On Wed, 2006-09-20 at 20:06 +0200, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
    > On Wed, 2006-09-20 at 10:52 -0700, Christoph Lameter wrote:
    > > On Wed, 20 Sep 2006, Rohit Seth wrote:
    > >
    > > > Right now the memory handler in this container subsystem is written in
    > > > such a way that when existing kernel reclaimer kicks in, it will first
    > > > operate on those (container with pages over the limit) pages first. But
    > > > in general I like the notion of containerizing the whole reclaim code.
    > >
    > > Which comes naturally with cpusets.
    > How are shared mappings dealt with, are pages charged to the set that
    > first faults them in?

    For anonymous pages (simpler case), they get charged to the faulting
    task's container.

    For filesystem pages (could be shared across tasks running different
    containers): Every time a new file mapping is created, it is bound to a
    container of the process creating that mapping. All subsequent pages
    belonging to this mapping will belong to this container, irrespective of
    different tasks running in different containers accessing these pages.
    Currently, I've not implemented a mechanism to allow a file to be
    specifically moved into or out of container. But when that gets
    implemented then all pages belonging to a mapping will also move out of
    container (or into a new container).


    To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
    the body of a message to
    More majordomo info at
    Please read the FAQ at

     \ /
      Last update: 2006-09-20 20:19    [W:0.020 / U:4.476 seconds]
    ©2003-2016 Jasper Spaans. hosted at Digital OceanAdvertise on this site