From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from psmtp.com (na3sys010amx109.postini.com [74.125.245.109]) by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 3DF936B0062 for ; Mon, 19 Dec 2011 11:24:28 -0500 (EST) Message-ID: <4EEF6532.3090201@redhat.com> Date: Mon, 19 Dec 2011 11:24:18 -0500 From: Rik van Riel MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: Android low memory killer vs. memory pressure notifications References: <20111219025328.GA26249@oksana.dev.rtsoft.ru> <20111219103954.354d68af@pyramind.ukuu.org.uk> <4EEF6360.4000306@gmail.com> In-Reply-To: <4EEF6360.4000306@gmail.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-linux-mm@kvack.org List-ID: To: KOSAKI Motohiro Cc: Alan Cox , Anton Vorontsov , KOSAKI Motohiro , =?UTF-8?B?QXJ2ZSBIasO4?= =?UTF-8?B?bm5ldsOlZw==?= , Pavel Machek , Greg Kroah-Hartman , Andrew Morton , David Rientjes , Michal Hocko , John Stultz , linux-mm@kvack.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On 12/19/2011 11:16 AM, KOSAKI Motohiro wrote: > (12/19/11 5:39 AM), Alan Cox wrote: >>> The main downside of this approach is that mem_cg needs 20 bytes per >>> page (on a 32 bit machine). So on a 32 bit machine with 4K pages >>> that's approx. 0.5% of RAM, or, in other words, 5MB on a 1GB machine. >> >> The obvious question would be why? Would fixing memcg make more sense ? > > Just historical reason. Initial memcg implement by IBM was just crap. And the reason for that, I suspect, is that the "proper" implementation changes the VM by so much that it would never have been merged in the first place... -- All rights reversed -- 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/ . Fight unfair telecom internet charges in Canada: sign http://stopthemeter.ca/ Don't email: email@kvack.org