Hi Pekka,
On Thu, Oct 25, 2012 at 09:44:52AM +0300, Pekka Enberg wrote:
On Thu, Oct 25, 2012 at 9:40 AM, Minchan Kim minchan@kernel.org wrote:
Your description doesn't include why we need new vmevent_fd(2). Of course, it's very flexible and potential to add new VM knob easily but the thing we is about to use now is only VMEVENT_ATTR_PRESSURE. Is there any other use cases for swap or free? or potential user? Adding vmevent_fd without them is rather overkill.
What ABI would you use instead?
I thought /dev/some_knob like mem_notify and epoll is enough but please keep in mind that I'm not against vmevent_fd strongly. My point is that description should include explain about why other candidate is not good or why vmevent_fd is better. (But at least, I don't like vmevent timer polling still and I hope we use it as last resort once we can find another)
On Thu, Oct 25, 2012 at 9:40 AM, Minchan Kim minchan@kernel.org wrote:
I don't object but we need rationale for adding new system call which should be maintained forever once we add it.
Agreed.
-- To unsubscribe, send a message with 'unsubscribe linux-mm' in the body to majordomo@kvack.org. For more info on Linux MM, see: http://www.linux-mm.org/ . Don't email: <a href=mailto:"dont@kvack.org"> email@kvack.org </a>