Messages in this thread | | | Date | Mon, 6 Feb 2023 12:36:25 -1000 | From | Tejun Heo <> | Subject | Re: [PATCH 14/19] mm: Introduce a cgroup for pinned memory |
| |
On Mon, Feb 06, 2023 at 02:32:10PM -0800, Yosry Ahmed wrote: > I guess it boils down to which we want: > (a) Limit the amount of memory processes in a cgroup can be pinned/locked. > (b) Limit the amount of memory charged to a cgroup that can be pinned/locked. > > The proposal is doing (a), I suppose if this was part of memcg it > would be (b), right? > > I am not saying it should be one or the other, I am just making sure > my understanding is clear.
I don't quite understand what the distinction would mean in practice. It's just odd to put locked memory in a separate controller from interface POV.
Thanks.
-- tejun
| |