On Thu, Oct 31, 2013 at 2:33 PM, Bill Nottingham <notting@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > Josh Boyer (jwboyer@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx) said: >> (As for memory-critical cloud... I have no idea what that is to be >> honest. All I hear from the cloud people is "smaller is better". >> Mostly that's image size, not memory overhead but I can imagine they >> want that limited as well.) > > Admittedly, it's not the same as unswappable kernel memory, but I wonder if > for 2MB we can find that sort of working set size reductions in other places > on the cloud image. Quite possibly so. I just hate to be wasteful if none of the 3 products clearly has a need. If 1024 is sufficient, we'll likely go with that. josh _______________________________________________ kernel mailing list kernel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/kernel
