From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from d03relay04.boulder.ibm.com (d03relay04.boulder.ibm.com [9.17.195.106]) by e36.co.us.ibm.com (8.12.11/8.12.11) with ESMTP id k2FFW2wi022757 for ; Wed, 15 Mar 2006 10:32:02 -0500 Received: from d03av02.boulder.ibm.com (d03av02.boulder.ibm.com [9.17.195.168]) by d03relay04.boulder.ibm.com (8.12.10/NCO/VER6.8) with ESMTP id k2FFYvJm106262 for ; Wed, 15 Mar 2006 08:34:57 -0700 Received: from d03av02.boulder.ibm.com (loopback [127.0.0.1]) by d03av02.boulder.ibm.com (8.12.11/8.13.3) with ESMTP id k2FFW1RB000597 for ; Wed, 15 Mar 2006 08:32:01 -0700 Subject: Re: [PATCH 03/03] Unmapped: Add guarantee code From: Chandra Seetharaman Reply-To: sekharan@us.ibm.com In-Reply-To: References: <20060310034412.8340.90939.sendpatchset@cherry.local> <20060310034429.8340.61997.sendpatchset@cherry.local> <44110727.802@yahoo.com.au> <1142005277.8174.107.camel@linuxchandra> Content-Type: text/plain Date: Wed, 15 Mar 2006 07:32:00 -0800 Message-Id: <1142436720.1658.29.camel@linuxchandra> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-linux-mm@kvack.org Return-Path: To: Magnus Damm Cc: Nick Piggin , Magnus Damm , Linux Kernel , linux-mm@kvack.org, Valerie Clement List-ID: On Sat, 2006-03-11 at 21:29 +0900, Magnus Damm wrote: > > > > The memory controller in ckrm also breaks out the LRU, but puts one > > > LRU instance in each class. My code does not depend on ckrm, but it > > > should be possible to have some kind of resource control with this > > > > i do not understand how breaking lru lists into mapped/unmapped pages > > and providing a knob to control the proportion of mapped/unmapped pages > > in a node help in resource control. > > It is one type of resource control. It is of course not a complete > solution like ckrm, but on machines with more than one node (or a > regular PC with numa emulation) it is possible to create partitions > using CPUSETS and then use this patch to control the amount of memory > that should be dedicated for say mapped pages on each node. > > CKRM and CPUSETS are the ways to provide resource control today. > CPUSETS is coarse-grained, but CKRM aims for finer granularity. None > of them have a way to control the ratio between mapped and unmapped > pages, excluding this patch. Oh... different type of resource control ? Controlling _how_ a resource is used rather than _who_ uses the resource (which is what CKRM intends to provide). > > I'd like to see CKRM merged, but I'm not the one calling the shots 8-) > (probably fortunate enough for everyone). I think CKRM has the same > properties as the ClockPRO work - it would be nice to have it included > in mainline, but these patches modify lots of crital code and > therefore has problems getting accepted that easily. > > So this patch is YASSITRD. (Yet Another Small Step In The Right Direction) > > Thank you! > > / magnus > > -- > 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 -- ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Chandra Seetharaman | Be careful what you choose.... - sekharan@us.ibm.com | .......you may get it. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- -- 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