On Wed, Apr 03, 2013 at 12:10:22PM +0200, Michael Kerrisk wrote:
> Hello Minchan,
>
> On Mon, Mar 25, 2013 at 7:21 AM, Minchan Kim wrote:
> > These day, there are many platforms avaiable in the embedded market
> > and they are smarter than kernel which has very limited information
> > about worki
Hi Michael,
On Wed, Apr 03, 2013 at 11:17:58AM +0200, Michael Kerrisk wrote:
> Hello Minchan,
>
> On Mon, Mar 25, 2013 at 7:21 AM, Minchan Kim wrote:
> > These day, there are many platforms avaiable in the embedded market
> > and they are smarter than kernel which has very limited information
>
> However, the interface is a quite blunt instrument. Would there be any
> virtue in extending it so that an address range could be written to
Here, I did mean to say "an *optional* address range.
Thanks,
Michael
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the b
Hello Minchan,
On Mon, Mar 25, 2013 at 7:21 AM, Minchan Kim wrote:
> These day, there are many platforms avaiable in the embedded market
> and they are smarter than kernel which has very limited information
> about working set so they want to involve memory management more heavily
> like android'
Hello Minchan,
On Mon, Mar 25, 2013 at 7:21 AM, Minchan Kim wrote:
> These day, there are many platforms avaiable in the embedded market
> and they are smarter than kernel which has very limited information
> about working set so they want to involve memory management more heavily
> like android'
These day, there are many platforms avaiable in the embedded market
and they are smarter than kernel which has very limited information
about working set so they want to involve memory management more heavily
like android's lowmemory killer and ashmem or recent many lowmemory
notifier(there was sev
6 matches
Mail list logo
