linux-kernel - Re: [-mm PATCH 0/7] Memory controller introduction

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:	Fri, 06 Jul 2007 18:06:52 +0400
From:	Pavel Emelianov <xemul@...nvz.org>
To:	Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
CC:	Balbir Singh <balbir@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>,
	Andrew Morton <akpm@...l.org>,
	Vaidyanathan Srinivasan <svaidy@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>,
	Linux Containers <containers@...ts.osdl.org>,
	Paul Menage <menage@...gle.com>,
	Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	Kirill Korotaev <dev@...nvz.org>
Subject: Re: [-mm PATCH 0/7] Memory controller introduction

Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> On Thu, 2007-07-05 at 13:14 +0400, Pavel Emelianov wrote:
> 
>> Separate limits for RSS and RSS+pagecache are also a must.
> 
> This I still disagree upon. Page-cache limits are orthogonal to
> containers and not a requirement for containers. If you want such a
> feature get it in Linux proper and don't sneak it in the backdoor via
> containers.

What I wanted to say is that *iff* we need limit for booth the RSS and
the page cache, then we do need a separate limit for the RSS only. I do
not vote for the page cache limit either, but I do not vote _against_ it
as well, and agree to take part in its development.

Thanks,
Pavel.

-
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/