From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1761369AbXGEOec (ORCPT ); Thu, 5 Jul 2007 10:34:32 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1757492AbXGEOeZ (ORCPT ); Thu, 5 Jul 2007 10:34:25 -0400 Received: from ausmtp05.au.ibm.com ([202.81.18.154]:38664 "EHLO ausmtp05.au.ibm.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1755471AbXGEOeY (ORCPT ); Thu, 5 Jul 2007 10:34:24 -0400 Message-ID: <468D00FF.6070106@linux.vnet.ibm.com> Date: Thu, 05 Jul 2007 07:32:31 -0700 From: Balbir Singh Reply-To: balbir@linux.vnet.ibm.com Organization: IBM User-Agent: Thunderbird 1.5.0.12 (X11/20070604) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Pavel Emelianov CC: Kirill Korotaev , Linux Kernel Mailing List , Linux Containers , Paul Menage Subject: Re: [-mm PATCH 0/7] Memory controller introduction References: <20070704222108.17702.40293.sendpatchset@balbir-laptop> <468CB658.7000204@openvz.org> In-Reply-To: <468CB658.7000204@openvz.org> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Hi, Pavel, Pavel Emelianov wrote: > Balbir Singh wrote: > > As far as I remember at OLS we decided to implement per-zone RLU > lists and reuse the lru lock as well. This will remove all the > problems with per-container lists inconsistency. > It's there in the TODO list. It is easy to implement. I can do that in the next revision. We are re-using the LRU lock, since the isolate_pages callback is called under the zone's LRU lock. > Separate limits for RSS and RSS+pagecache are also a must. > I remember that we discussed having one limit, but we can come up with a configuration parameter to do it. I'll do that in the next release. > BTW, if you send smb. else's patches you may include a 'From: xxx' > line into the letter to address the original author. > I'll do that for the res_counters_infra patch. Although I had used res_counter, the hooks in mm_struct earlier (http://lkml.org/lkml/2007/2/19/12). A lot of the code for the reclaim logic and the meta_page is yours. Please do identify patches where you would like to see your signed-off-by and where you think the entire patch is completely yours. -- Warm Regards, Balbir Singh Linux Technology Center IBM, ISTL