From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from psmtp.com (na3sys010amx198.postini.com [74.125.245.198]) by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 2F07B6B0062 for ; Thu, 25 Oct 2012 02:44:54 -0400 (EDT) Received: by mail-wi0-f169.google.com with SMTP id hq4so5099139wib.2 for ; Wed, 24 Oct 2012 23:44:52 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <20121025064009.GA15767@bbox> References: <20121022111928.GA12396@lizard> <20121025064009.GA15767@bbox> Date: Thu, 25 Oct 2012 09:44:52 +0300 Message-ID: Subject: Re: [RFC v2 0/2] vmevent: A bit reworked pressure attribute + docs + man page From: Pekka Enberg Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Sender: owner-linux-mm@kvack.org List-ID: To: Minchan Kim Cc: Anton Vorontsov , Mel Gorman , Leonid Moiseichuk , KOSAKI Motohiro , Bartlomiej Zolnierkiewicz , John Stultz , linux-mm@kvack.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linaro-kernel@lists.linaro.org, patches@linaro.org, kernel-team@android.com, linux-man@vger.kernel.org On Thu, Oct 25, 2012 at 9:40 AM, Minchan Kim wrote: > Your description doesn't include why we need new vmevent_fd(2). > Of course, it's very flexible and potential to add new VM knob easily but > the thing we is about to use now is only VMEVENT_ATTR_PRESSURE. > Is there any other use cases for swap or free? or potential user? > Adding vmevent_fd without them is rather overkill. What ABI would you use instead? On Thu, Oct 25, 2012 at 9:40 AM, Minchan Kim wrote: > I don't object but we need rationale for adding new system call which should > be maintained forever once we add it. Agreed. -- 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