[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <48245308.9010401@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
Date: Fri, 09 May 2008 19:05:04 +0530
From: Balbir Singh <balbir@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>
To: Paul Menage <menage@...gle.com>
CC: linux-mm@...ck.org, Sudhir Kumar <skumar@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>,
YAMAMOTO Takashi <yamamoto@...inux.co.jp>, lizf@...fujitsu.com,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, David Rientjes <rientjes@...gle.com>,
Pavel Emelianov <xemul@...nvz.org>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki <kamezawa.hiroyu@...fujitsu.com>
Subject: Re: [-mm][PATCH 3/4] Add rlimit controller accounting and control
Paul Menage wrote:
> On Thu, May 8, 2008 at 7:35 AM, Balbir Singh <balbir@...ux.vnet.ibm.com> wrote:
>> I currently intend to use this controller for controlling memory related
>> rlimits, like address space and mlock'ed memory. How about we use something like
>> "memrlimit"?
>
> Sounds reasonable.
>
>> Good suggestion, but it will be hard if not impossible to account the data
>> correctly as it changes, if we do the accounting/summation at bind time. We'll
>> need a really big lock to do it, something I want to avoid. Did you have
>> something else in mind?
>
> Yes, it'll be tricky but I think worthwhile. I believe it can be done
> without the charge/uncharge code needing to take a global lock, except
> for when we're actually binding/unbinding, with careful use of RCU.
>
[snip]
This is an optimization that I am willing to consider later in the project. At
first I want to focus on functionality. I would like to optimize once I know
that the functionality has been well tested by a good base of users and make
sure that the optimization is real.
--
Warm Regards,
Balbir Singh
Linux Technology Center
IBM, ISTL
--
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/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists