On Thu, 2006-08-17 at 17:27 +0400, Kirill Korotaev wrote: > > If I'm reading this patch right then seems like you are making page > > allocations to fail w/o (for example) trying to purge some pages from > > the page cache belonging to this container. Or is that reclaim going to > > come later? > > charged kernel objects can't be _reclaimed_. how do you propose > to reclaim tasks page tables or files or task struct or vma or etc.?
I agree that kernel objects cann't be reclaimed easily. But what you are proposing is also not right. Returning failure w/o doing any reclaim on pages (that are reclaimable) is not useful. And this is why I asked, is this change going to be part of next set of patches (as current set of patches are only tracking kernel usage). -rohit ------------------------------------------------------------------------- Using Tomcat but need to do more? Need to support web services, security? Get stuff done quickly with pre-integrated technology to make your job easier Download IBM WebSphere Application Server v.1.0.1 based on Apache Geronimo http://sel.as-us.falkag.net/sel?cmd=lnk&kid=120709&bid=263057&dat=121642 _______________________________________________ ckrm-tech mailing list https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/ckrm-tech
