Messages in this thread | | | Date | Fri, 28 Aug 2009 23:29:09 +0900 (JST) | Subject | Re: [RFC][PATCH 1/5] memcg: change for softlimit. | From | "KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki" <> |
| |
Balbir Singh wrote: > * KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki <kamezawa.hiroyu@jp.fujitsu.com> [2009-08-28 > 16:35:23]: >
>> >> Current soft-limit RB-tree will be easily broken i.e. not-sorted >> correctly >> if used under use_hierarchy=1. >> > > Not true, I think the sorted-ness is delayed and is seen when we pick > a tree for reclaim. Think of it as being lazy :) > plz explain how enexpectedly unsorted RB-tree can work sanely.
>> My patch disallows set softlimit to Bob and Mike, just allows against >> Gold >> because there can be considered as the same class, hierarchy. >> > > But Bob and Mike might need to set soft limits between themselves. if > soft limit of gold is 1G and bob needs to be close to 750M and mike > 250M, how do we do it without supporting what we have today? > Don't use hierarchy or don't use softlimit. (I never think fine-grain soft limit can be useful.)
Anyway, I have to modify unnecessary hacks for res_counter of softlimit. plz allow modification. that's bad. I postpone RB-tree breakage problem, plz explain it or fix it by yourself.
Thanks, -Kame
| |