Messages in this thread | | | Date | Wed, 3 Jun 2009 14:01:02 +0900 | From | Daisuke Nishimura <> | Subject | Re: [PATCH mmotm 2/2] memcg: allow mem.limit bigger than memsw.limit iff unlimited |
| |
On Wed, 3 Jun 2009 12:52:28 +0900, KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki <kamezawa.hiroyu@jp.fujitsu.com> wrote: > On Wed, 3 Jun 2009 11:50:27 +0900 > Daisuke Nishimura <nishimura@mxp.nes.nec.co.jp> wrote: > > > Now users cannot set mem.limit bigger than memsw.limit. > > This patch allows mem.limit bigger than memsw.limit iff mem.limit==unlimited. > > > > By this, users can set memsw.limit without setting mem.limit. > > I think it's usefull if users want to limit memsw only. > > They must set mem.limit first and memsw.limit to the same value now for this purpose. > > They can save the first step by this patch. > > > > I don't like this. No benefits to users. > The user should know when they set memsw.limit they have to set memory.limit. > This just complicates things. > Hmm, I think there is a user who cares only limitting logical memory(mem+swap), not physical memory, and wants kswapd to reclaim physical memory when congested. At least, I'm a such user.
Do you disagree even if I add a file like "memory.allow_limit_memsw_only" ?
Thanks, Daisuke Nishimura.
> If you want to do this, add an interface as > memory.all.limit_in_bytes (or some better name) > and allow to set memory.limit and memory.memsw.limit _at once_. > > But I'm not sure it's worth to try. Saving user's few steps by the kenerl patch ? > > Thanks, > -Kame > >
| |