Re: lowmemory android driver not needed?

[Trilok Soni <soni.trilok@gmail.com>]

Hi

On Wed, Jan 21, 2009 at 8:20 AM, KOSAKI Motohiro
<kosaki.motohiro@jp.fujitsu.com> wrote:

>>
>> Care to work on your mem_notify patch again and bring it up to date?
>> That would be a good place to start working from, right?
>
> Unfortunately No ;)
>
> I should rewrite memory notification patchset from scratch.
> the new version will construct on memcg infrastrcture.
>
> Why?
>
> last year, I received many feedback from lkml folks and my article reader.
> (I monthly write kernel patch introduction article to japanese web
>  magazine and receive some feedback periodically)
>
> I learned many people want flexibility notification.
> (per workload, per user, et al)
> eg. nokia lowmem driver have exception process defined by uid.
>
> at top of last year, I thought memcg don't provide good infrastructure.
> the first version memcg is just pretty funny joke. if its config turn on,
> memory workload performance decrease ~30% although the user don't use
> memcg at runtime. then nobody use it.
> but recently, KAMEZAWA hiroyuki (and Li zefan, Daisuke Nishimura et al)
> dramatically improvement memcg performance.
> now, memcg overhead become less than 1%.
>
> Then, I think any memory accounting activity should use this infrastructure.
> That's my homework.

Any updates on top of  mem_notify v6 patches?  Is there any WIP for
mem_notify with memcg infrastructure as you have pointed out above?


-- 
---Trilok Soni
http://triloksoni.wordpress.com
http://www.linkedin.com/in/triloksoni