Messages in this thread | | | Date | Mon, 30 Jun 2008 09:30:50 +0530 | From | Balbir Singh <> | Subject | Re: [RFC 0/5] Memory controller soft limit introduction (v3) |
| |
KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki wrote: > Hmm, that is the case where "share" works well. Why soft-limit ? > i/o conroller doesn't support share ? (I don' know sorry.) >
Share is a proportional allocation of a resource. Typically that resource is soft-limits, but not necessarily. If we re-use resource counters, my expectation is that
A share implementation would under-neath use soft-limits.
> yes. what I want to say is you should take care of this. >
Yes, it will
> Anyway, I think you should revisit the whole memory reclaim and fixes small bugs? > which doesn't meet soft-limit. >
I'll revisit the full thing, I am revisiting parts of it as I write the soft limit feature.
-- Warm Regards, Balbir Singh Linux Technology Center IBM, ISTL
| |