Messages in this thread |  | | | Date | Thu, 4 Jun 2009 16:31:10 +0800 | | From | Balbir Singh <> | | Subject | Re: [PATCH] remove memory.limit v.s. memsw.limit comparison. |
| |
* KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki <kamezawa.hiroyu@jp.fujitsu.com> [2009-06-04 14:10:43]:
> From: KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki <kamezawa.hiroyu@jp.fujitsu.com> > > Removes memory.limit < memsw.limit at setting limit check completely. > > The limitation "memory.limit <= memsw.limit" was added just because > it seems sane ...if memory.limit > memsw.limit, only memsw.limit works. > > But To implement this limitation, we needed to use private mutex and make > the code a bit complated. > As Nishimura pointed out, in real world, there are people who only want > to use memsw.limit. > > Then, this patch removes the check. user-land library or middleware can check > this in userland easily if this really concerns. > > And this is a good change to charge-and-reclaim. > > Now, memory.limit is always checked before memsw.limit > and it may do swap-out. But, if memory.limit == memsw.limit, swap-out is > finally no help and hits memsw.limit again. So, let's allow the condition > memory.limit > memsw.limit. Then we can skip unnecesary swap-out. > > Signed-off-by: KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki <kamezawa.hiroyu@jp.fujitsu.com>
We can't change behaviour this way without breaking userspace scripts, API and code. What does it mean for people already using these features? Does it break their workflow?
-- Balbir
|  |