From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Message-ID: <47DDCDA7.4020108@cn.fujitsu.com> Date: Mon, 17 Mar 2008 10:47:19 +0900 From: Li Zefan MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: [RFC][0/3] Virtual address space control for cgroups References: <20080316172942.8812.56051.sendpatchset@localhost.localdomain> <6599ad830803161626q1fcf261bta52933bb5e7a6bdd@mail.gmail.com> In-Reply-To: <6599ad830803161626q1fcf261bta52933bb5e7a6bdd@mail.gmail.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-linux-mm@kvack.org Return-Path: To: Paul Menage Cc: Balbir Singh , linux-mm@kvack.org, Hugh Dickins , Sudhir Kumar , YAMAMOTO Takashi , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, taka@valinux.co.jp, David Rientjes , Pavel Emelianov , Andrew Morton , KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki List-ID: Paul Menage wrote: > On Mon, Mar 17, 2008 at 1:29 AM, Balbir Singh wrote: >> This is an early patchset for virtual address space control for cgroups. >> The patches are against 2.6.25-rc5-mm1 and have been tested on top of >> User Mode Linux. > > What's the performance hit of doing these accounting checks on every > mmap/munmap? If it's not totally lost in the noise, couldn't it be > made a separate control group, so that it could be just enabled (and > the performance hit taken) for users that actually want it? > It will be code duplication to make it a new subsystem, and it will be useful to control both of them, am I right? :) So could we just add a CONFIG to this patch series, like: CONFIG_CGROUP_MEM_RES_AS_CTLR ? > Paul > > -- 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