Messages in this thread |  | | Subject | Re: [ckrm-tech] [RFC][PATCH 5/7] UBC: kernel memory accounting (core) | | From | Rohit Seth <> | | Date | Thu, 17 Aug 2006 10:16:43 -0700 |
| |
On Thu, 2006-08-17 at 07:26 -0700, Dave Hansen wrote: > On Thu, 2006-08-17 at 01:24 +0100, Alan Cox wrote: > > Ar Mer, 2006-08-16 am 12:59 -0700, ysgrifennodd Dave Hansen: > > > relationship between processes and mm's. We could also potentially have > > > two different threads of a process in two different accounting contexts. > > > But, that might be as simple to fix as disallowing things that share mms > > > from being in different accounting contexts, unless you unshare the mm. > > > > At the point I have twenty containers containing 20 copies of glibc to > > meet your suggestion it would be *far* cheaper to put it in the page > > struct. > > My main thought is that _everybody_ is going to have to live with the > entry in the 'struct page'. Distros ship one kernel for everybody, and > the cost will be paid by those not even using any kind of resource > control or containers. > > That said, it sure is simpler to implement, so I'm all for it!
hmm, not sure why it is simpler.
-rohit
- 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/
|  |