[lkml]   [2008]   [Jun]   [30]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
    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

     \ /
      Last update: 2008-06-30 06:05    [W:0.040 / U:1.556 seconds]
    ©2003-2016 Jasper Spaans. hosted at Digital OceanAdvertise on this site