Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1751361AbWHRKwI (ORCPT ); Fri, 18 Aug 2006 06:52:08 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1751365AbWHRKwI (ORCPT ); Fri, 18 Aug 2006 06:52:08 -0400 Received: from mailhub.sw.ru ([195.214.233.200]:39853 "EHLO relay.sw.ru") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751361AbWHRKwG (ORCPT ); Fri, 18 Aug 2006 06:52:06 -0400 Message-ID: <44E59C65.7000807@sw.ru> Date: Fri, 18 Aug 2006 14:54:29 +0400 From: Kirill Korotaev User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux i686; en-US; rv:1.7.13) Gecko/20060417 X-Accept-Language: en-us, en, ru MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Andi Kleen CC: Alan Cox , Dave Hansen , rohitseth@google.com, Rik van Riel , ckrm-tech@lists.sourceforge.net, Linux Kernel Mailing List , Christoph Hellwig , Andrey Savochkin , devel@openvz.org, hugh@veritas.com, Ingo Molnar , Pavel Emelianov Subject: Re: [ckrm-tech] [RFC][PATCH 5/7] UBC: kernel memory accounting (core) References: <44E33893.6020700@sw.ru> <1155824788.9274.32.camel@localhost.localdomain> <1155826917.15195.101.camel@localhost.localdomain> <200608171804.41433.ak@suse.de> In-Reply-To: <200608171804.41433.ak@suse.de> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 1286 Lines: 34 Andi Kleen wrote: >>I don't see any good way around that. For the page struct it is a >>material issue, for the others its not a big deal providing we avoid >>accounting dumb stuff like dentries. >> >>At the VM summit Linus suggested one option for user page allocation >>tracking would be to track not per page but by block of pages (say the >>2MB chunks) and hand those out per container. That would really need the >>defrag work though. > > > One could always use a second set of arrays, mirroring mem_map which one do you prefer: - having a pointer on the struct page? kernels without resource accounting won't have this. - having a mirroring mem_map? on i686 it is easy, but not sure about sparse mem or numa configurations. advantage: run-time configurable on boot time. disadvantage: much lower performance with accounting. - address_space/anon_vma can be replaced with some kind of proxy object with 2 pointers - address_space and ub. however I don't see how it is better then a single ptr on page. Thanks, Kirill - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/