Linux-kernel mailing list archive 2000-23,: Re: (reiserfs) Re: New Linux 2.5 - 2.6 TODO (Alan Cox suggestsdelaying

# Re: (reiserfs) Re: New Linux 2.5 - 2.6 TODO (Alan Cox suggestsdelaying

Andi Kleen (ak@suse.de)
Tue, 6 Jun 2000 14:08:09 +0200

- Messages sorted by: [ date ][ thread ][ subject ][ author ]
- Next message: Maciej W. Rozycki: "Re: Why reassert ix86 NMI?"
- Previous message: Jesse Pollard: "Re: ULTRA ATA/100 announced"
- In reply to: Alan Cox: "Re: (reiserfs) Re: New Linux 2.5 - 2.6 TODO (Alan Cox suggestsdelaying"
- Next in thread: Stephen C. Tweedie: "Re: (reiserfs) Re: New Linux 2.5 - 2.6 TODO (Alan Cox suggestsdelaying"

On Tue, Jun 06, 2000 at 12:50:37PM +0100, Alan Cox wrote:
> > I would have used a global hook (register_memory_pressure_handler())
> > Hmm, ok a super block vector would do too, but the global hook would
> > be probably useful for other things too (e.g. networking could use it for
> > its skb caches). Block device interface has nothing to do with the VFS
> > imho (you may be using a different definition of VFS than me tho)
>
> A notifier chain seems the obvious thing to use for it then ?

Yes.

-Andi

-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.rutgers.edu
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/

- Next message: Maciej W. Rozycki: "Re: Why reassert ix86 NMI?"
- Previous message: Jesse Pollard: "Re: ULTRA ATA/100 announced"
- In reply to: Alan Cox: "Re: (reiserfs) Re: New Linux 2.5 - 2.6 TODO (Alan Cox suggestsdelaying"
- Next in thread: Stephen C. Tweedie: "Re: (reiserfs) Re: New Linux 2.5 - 2.6 TODO (Alan Cox suggestsdelaying"