Messages in this thread | | | Date | Thu, 21 Feb 2008 12:22:07 +0530 | From | Balbir Singh <> | Subject | Re: [PATCH] Document huge memory/cache overhead of memory controller in Kconfig |
| |
KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki wrote: > On Wed, 20 Feb 2008 21:45:13 +0530 > Balbir Singh <balbir@linux.vnet.ibm.com> wrote: > >>> But for computers, limits is an expected and understood term, and for >>> filesystems it's quotas. So in this case, I *still* think you should >>> be using the term "Memory Quota Controller" instead. It just makes it >>> clearer to a larger audience what you mean. >>> >> Memory Quota sounds very confusing to me. Usually a quota implies limits, but in >> a true framework, one can also implement guarantees and shares. >> > This "cgroup memory contoller" is called as "Memory Resource Contoller" > in my office ;) > > How about Memory Resouce Contoller ?
That is a good name and believe me or not I was thinking of the same name.
-- Warm Regards, Balbir Singh Linux Technology Center IBM, ISTL
| |