![]() | ||||||||||
Messages in this thread |
> On Mon, Mar 31, 2008 at 11:03 PM, YAMAMOTO Takashi > <yamamoto@valinux.co.jp> wrote: > > > > changing mm->owner without notifying controllers makes it difficult to use. > > can you provide a notification mechanism? > > > > Yes, I think that call will need to be in the task_lock() critical > section in which we update mm->owner. > > Right now I think the only user that needs to be notified at that > point is Balbir's virtual address limits controller. > > Paul i have some code for which i might want to use mm->owner. it does somewhat complicated things like acquiring mm_sem and traversing ptes in its ->attach hook. (if you want to read the code, search "Subject: [RFC][PATCH] another swap controller for cgroup" in ML archive.) probably i don't need to use mm->owner, but it's better if mm->owner can handle more cases anyway. YAMAMOTO Takashi -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/ | |||||||||
| Last update: 2008-04-01 08:27 [from the cache] ©2003-2008 | ||||||||||