Re: [PATCH] Document huge memory/cache overhead of memory controller in Kconfig

[Balbir Singh <balbir@linux.vnet.ibm.com>]

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

--
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: <a href=mailto:"dont@kvack.org"> email@kvack.org </a>