lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2008]   [Feb]   [21]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
    /
    Date
    From
    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 <balbir@linux.vnet.ibm.com> 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
    IBM, ISTL


    \
     
     \ /
      Last update: 2008-02-21 07:59    [W:0.020 / U:59.764 seconds]
    ©2003-2016 Jasper Spaans. hosted at Digital OceanAdvertise on this site