Re: [ckrm-tech] [RFC][PATCH 5/7] UBC: kernel memory accounting (core)

From: Kirill Korotaev
Date: Fri Aug 18 2006 - 04:24:36 EST

Rik van Riel wrote:
Dave Hansen wrote:

My main thought is that _everybody_ is going to have to live with the
entry in the 'struct page'. Distros ship one kernel for everybody, and
the cost will be paid by those not even using any kind of resource
control or containers.

Every userspace or page cache page will be in an object
though. Could we do the pointer on a per object (mapping,
anon vma, ...) basis?
in this case no memory fractions accounting is possible :/
please, note, this field added by this patchset is in union
and used by user pages accounting as well.

Kernel pages are not using all of their struct page entries,
so we could overload a field.
yeah, we can. probably mapping.
but as I said we use the same pointer for user pages accounting as well.

It all depends on how much we really care about not growing
struct page :)
so what is your opinion?
Kernel compiled w/o UBC do not introduce additional pointer.


To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at
Please read the FAQ at