On 10/18/2012 11:21 PM, Andrew Morton wrote:
> On Thu, 18 Oct 2012 20:51:05 +0400
> Glauber Costa wrote:
>
>> On 10/18/2012 02:11 AM, Andrew Morton wrote:
>>> On Tue, 16 Oct 2012 14:16:37 +0400
>>> Glauber Costa wrote:
>>>
...
A general explanation of what this is all about follow
On Thu, 18 Oct 2012 20:51:05 +0400
Glauber Costa wrote:
> On 10/18/2012 02:11 AM, Andrew Morton wrote:
> > On Tue, 16 Oct 2012 14:16:37 +0400
> > Glauber Costa wrote:
> >
> >> ...
> >>
> >> A general explanation of what this is all about follows:
> >>
> >> The kernel memory limitation mechanism
On 10/18/2012 02:11 AM, Andrew Morton wrote:
> On Tue, 16 Oct 2012 14:16:37 +0400
> Glauber Costa wrote:
>
>> ...
>>
>> A general explanation of what this is all about follows:
>>
>> The kernel memory limitation mechanism for memcg concerns itself with
>> disallowing potentially non-reclaimable a
On Tue, 16 Oct 2012 14:16:37 +0400
Glauber Costa wrote:
> ...
>
> A general explanation of what this is all about follows:
>
> The kernel memory limitation mechanism for memcg concerns itself with
> disallowing potentially non-reclaimable allocations to happen in exaggerate
> quantities by a par
Hi,
This is the first part of the kernel memory controller for memcg. It has been
discussed many times, and I consider this stable enough to be on tree. A follow
up to this series are the patches to also track slab memory. They are not
included here because I believe we could benefit from merging
5 matches
Mail list logo