From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Date: Wed, 20 Sep 2006 10:52:12 -0700 (PDT) From: Christoph Lameter Subject: Re: [patch00/05]: Containers(V2)- Introduction In-Reply-To: <1158774657.8574.65.camel@galaxy.corp.google.com> Message-ID: References: <1158718568.29000.44.camel@galaxy.corp.google.com> <4510D3F4.1040009@yahoo.com.au> <1158751720.8970.67.camel@twins> <4511626B.9000106@yahoo.com.au> <1158767787.3278.103.camel@taijtu> <451173B5.1000805@yahoo.com.au> <1158774657.8574.65.camel@galaxy.corp.google.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: owner-linux-mm@kvack.org Return-Path: To: Rohit Seth Cc: Nick Piggin , Peter Zijlstra , CKRM-Tech , devel@openvz.org, linux-kernel , Linux Memory Management List-ID: On Wed, 20 Sep 2006, Rohit Seth wrote: > Right now the memory handler in this container subsystem is written in > such a way that when existing kernel reclaimer kicks in, it will first > operate on those (container with pages over the limit) pages first. But > in general I like the notion of containerizing the whole reclaim code. Which comes naturally with cpusets. -- 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