[lkml]   [2008]   [Feb]   [21]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
SubjectRe: [PATCH] Document huge memory/cache overhead of memory controller in Kconfig
KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki wrote:
> On Wed, 20 Feb 2008 21:45:13 +0530
> Balbir Singh <> wrote:
>>> But for computers, limits is an expected and understood term, and for
>>> filesystems it's quotas. So in this case, I *still* think you should
>>> be using the term "Memory Quota Controller" instead. It just makes it
>>> clearer to a larger audience what you mean.
>> Memory Quota sounds very confusing to me. Usually a quota implies limits, but in
>> a true framework, one can also implement guarantees and shares.
> This "cgroup memory contoller" is called as "Memory Resource Contoller"
> in my office ;)
> How about Memory Resouce Contoller ?

That is a good name and believe me or not I was thinking of the same name.

Warm Regards,
Balbir Singh
Linux Technology Center

 \ /
  Last update: 2008-02-21 07:59    [W:0.066 / U:1.556 seconds]
©2003-2018 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site