lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2008]   [Jun]   [30]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: [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


\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2008-06-30 06:05    [from the cache]
©2003-2011 Jasper Spaans