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 14:01:02 +0900
Daisuke Nishimura <nishimura@mxp.nes.nec.co.jp> wrote:

> 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" ?
>
We can it _now_.

Thanks,
-Kame



\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2009-06-03 10:25    [W:0.062 / U:0.468 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site