Messages in this thread | | | Subject | Re: [RFC][PATCH 5/7] UBC: kernel memory accounting (core) | From | Rohit Seth <> | Date | Thu, 17 Aug 2006 10:13:11 -0700 |
| |
On Thu, 2006-08-17 at 17:35 +0400, Kirill Korotaev wrote:
> > My preference would be to have container (I keep on saying container, > > but resource beancounter) pointer embeded in task, mm(not sure), > > address_space and anon_vma structures. This should allow us to track > > user land pages optimally. But for tracking kernel usage on behalf of > > user, we will have to use an additional field (unless we can re-use > > mapping). Please correct me if I'm wrong, though all the kernel > > resources will be allocated/freed in context of a user process. And at > > that time we know if a allocation should succeed or not. So we may > > actually not need to track kernel pages that closely. We are not going > > to run reclaim on any of them anyways. > objects are really allocated in process context > (except for TCP/IP and other softirqs which are done in arbitrary > process context!)
Can these pages be tagged using mapping field of the page struct.
> And objects are not always freed in correct context (!). > You mean beyond Networking and softirq.
> Note, page_ub is not for _user_ pages. user pages accounting will be added > in next patch set. page_ub is added to track kernel allocations. >
But will the page_ub be used for some purpose for user land pages?
-rohit
- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
| |