Messages in this thread | | | Date | Mon, 1 Apr 2013 13:29:43 -0700 | From | Tejun Heo <> | Subject | Re: [PATCH 00/10] cgroups: Task counter subsystem v8 |
| |
On Mon, Apr 01, 2013 at 01:09:09PM -0700, Tim Hockin wrote: > Pardon my ignorance, but... what? Use kernel memory limits as a proxy > for process/thread counts? That sounds terrible - I hope I am
Well, the argument was that process / thread counts were a poor and unnecessary proxy for kernel memory consumption limit. IIRC, Johannes put it as (I'm paraphrasing) "you can't go to Fry's and buy 4k thread worth of component".
> misunderstanding? This task counter patch had several properties that > mapped very well to what we want. > > Is it dead in the water?
After some discussion, Frederic agreed that at least his use case can be served well by kmemcg, maybe even better - IIRC it was container fork bomb scenario, so you'll have to argue your way in why kmemcg isn't a suitable solution for your use case if you wanna revive this.
Thanks.
-- tejun
| |