lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2009]   [Jun]   [3]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: [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
>
>


\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2009-06-03 07:21    [W:0.086 / U:1.152 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site