Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1750882AbWIUAsS (ORCPT ); Wed, 20 Sep 2006 20:48:18 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1750884AbWIUAsS (ORCPT ); Wed, 20 Sep 2006 20:48:18 -0400 Received: from fgwmail5.fujitsu.co.jp ([192.51.44.35]:37534 "EHLO fgwmail5.fujitsu.co.jp") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1750882AbWIUAsQ (ORCPT ); Wed, 20 Sep 2006 20:48:16 -0400 Date: Thu, 21 Sep 2006 09:51:00 +0900 From: KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki To: Christoph Lameter Cc: lhms-devel@lists.sourceforge.net, npiggin@suse.de, ckrm-tech@lists.sourceforge.net, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, pj@sgi.com, rohitseth@google.com, devel@openvz.org Subject: Re: [Lhms-devel] [patch00/05]: Containers(V2)- Introduction Message-Id: <20060921095100.25e02b5c.kamezawa.hiroyu@jp.fujitsu.com> In-Reply-To: References: <1158718568.29000.44.camel@galaxy.corp.google.com> <1158773208.8574.53.camel@galaxy.corp.google.com> <1158775678.8574.81.camel@galaxy.corp.google.com> <20060920155815.33b03991.pj@sgi.com> <1158794808.7207.14.camel@galaxy.corp.google.com> Organization: Fujitsu X-Mailer: Sylpheed version 2.2.0 (GTK+ 2.6.10; i686-pc-mingw32) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 1399 Lines: 35 On Wed, 20 Sep 2006 16:31:22 -0700 (PDT) Christoph Lameter wrote: > On Wed, 20 Sep 2006, Rohit Seth wrote: > > > Absolutely. Since these containers are not (hard) partitioning the > > memory in any way so it is easy to change the limits (effectively > > reducing and increasing the memory limits for tasks belonging to > > containers). As you said, memory hot-un-plug is important and it is > > non-trivial amount of work. > > Maybe the hotplug guys want to contribute to the discussion? > Ah, I'm reading threads with interest. I think this discussion is about using fake nodes ('struct pgdat') to divide system's memory into some chunks. Your thought is that for resizing/adding/removing fake pgdat, memory-hot-plug codes may be useful. correct ? Now, memory-hotplug manages all memory by 'section' and allows adding/(removing) section to pgdat. Does this section-size handling meet container people's requirement ? And do we need freeing page when pgdat is removed ? I think at least SPARSEMEM is useful for fake nodes because 'struct page' are not tied to pgdat. (DISCONTIGMEM uses node_start_pfn. SPARSEMEM not.) -Kame - 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/