linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v2 0/4] memcg: Low-limit reclaim

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:	Tue, 29 Apr 2014 14:50:18 +0400
From:	Roman Gushchin <klamm@...dex-team.ru>
To:	Greg Thelen <gthelen@...gle.com>
Cc:	Michal Hocko <mhocko@...e.cz>,
	Johannes Weiner <hannes@...xchg.org>,
	Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
	KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki <kamezawa.hiroyu@...fujitsu.com>,
	KOSAKI Motohiro <kosaki.motohiro@...fujitsu.com>,
	Michel Lespinasse <walken@...gle.com>,
	Tejun Heo <tj@...nel.org>, Hugh Dickins <hughd@...gle.com>,
	LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	"linux-mm@...ck.org" <linux-mm@...ck.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 0/4] memcg: Low-limit reclaim

29.04.2014, 11:42, "Greg Thelen" <gthelen@...gle.com>:
> On Mon, Apr 28 2014, Roman Gushchin <klamm@...dex-team.ru> wrote:
>
>>  28.04.2014, 16:27, "Michal Hocko" <mhocko@...e.cz>:
>>>  The series is based on top of the current mmotm tree. Once the series
>>>  gets accepted I will post a patch which will mark the soft limit as
>>>  deprecated with a note that it will be eventually dropped. Let me know
>>>  if you would prefer to have such a patch a part of the series.
>>>
>>>  Thoughts?
>>  Looks good to me.
>>
>>  The only question is: are there any ideas how the hierarchy support
>>  will be used in this case in practice?
>>  Will someone set low limit for non-leaf cgroups? Why?
>>
>>  Thanks,
>>  Roman
>
> I imagine that a hosting service may want to give X MB to a top level
> memcg (/a) with sub-jobs (/a/b, /a/c) which may(not) have their own
> low-limits.
>
> Examples:
>
> case_1) only set low limit on /a.  /a/b and /a/c may overcommit /a's
>         memory (b.limit_in_bytes + c.limit_in_bytes > a.limit_in_bytes).
>
> case_2) low limits on all memcg.  But not overcommitting low_limits
>         (b.low_limit_in_in_bytes + c.low_limit_in_in_bytes <=
>         a.low_limit_in_in_bytes).

Thanks!

With use_hierarchy turned on it looks perfectly usable.
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/