From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from psmtp.com (na3sys010amx156.postini.com [74.125.245.156]) by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 9F2C96B005D for ; Wed, 7 Nov 2012 06:41:45 -0500 (EST) Date: Wed, 7 Nov 2012 13:43:22 +0200 From: "Kirill A. Shutemov" Subject: Re: [RFC v3 0/3] vmpressure_fd: Linux VM pressure notifications Message-ID: <20121107114321.GA32265@shutemov.name> References: <20121107105348.GA25549@lizard> <20121107112136.GA31715@shutemov.name> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: Sender: owner-linux-mm@kvack.org List-ID: To: Pekka Enberg Cc: Anton Vorontsov , Mel Gorman , Leonid Moiseichuk , KOSAKI Motohiro , Minchan Kim , Bartlomiej Zolnierkiewicz , John Stultz , linux-mm@kvack.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linaro-kernel@lists.linaro.org, patches@linaro.org, kernel-team@android.com, linux-man@vger.kernel.org On Wed, Nov 07, 2012 at 01:28:12PM +0200, Pekka Enberg wrote: > On Wed, Nov 7, 2012 at 1:21 PM, Kirill A. Shutemov wrote: > >> While the new API is very simple, it is still extensible (i.e. versioned). > > > > Sorry, I didn't follow previous discussion on this, but could you > > explain what's wrong with memory notifications from memcg? > > As I can see you can get pretty similar functionality using memory > > thresholds on the root cgroup. What's the point? > > Why should you be required to use cgroups to get VM pressure events to > userspace? Valid point. But in fact you have it on most systems anyway. I personally don't like to have a syscall per small feature. Isn't it better to have a file-based interface which can be used with normal file syscalls: open()/read()/poll()? -- Kirill A. Shutemov -- To unsubscribe, send a message with 'unsubscribe linux-mm' in the body to majordomo@kvack.org. For more info on Linux MM, see: http://www.linux-mm.org/ . Don't email: email@kvack.org