lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2013]   [Apr]   [1]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: [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


\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2013-04-01 23:21    [W:0.086 / U:0.700 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site