[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <484E0D73.6010609@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
Date: Tue, 10 Jun 2008 10:43:23 +0530
From: Balbir Singh <balbir@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>
To: KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki <kamezawa.hiroyu@...fujitsu.com>
CC: Andrea Righi <righi.andrea@...il.com>, menage@...gle.com,
kosaki.motohiro@...fujitsu.com, xemul@...nvz.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, containers@...ts.osdl.org
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH 0/5] memcg: VM overcommit accounting and handling
KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki wrote:
> On Tue, 10 Jun 2008 01:32:58 +0200
> Andrea Righi <righi.andrea@...il.com> wrote:
>
>> Provide distinct cgroup VM overcommit accounting and handling using the memory
>> resource controller.
>>
>
> Could you explain the benefits of this even when we have memrlimit controller ?
> (If unsure, see 2.6.26-rc5-mm1 and search memrlimit controller.)
>
> And this kind of virtual-address-handling things should be implemented on
> memrlimit controller (means not on memory-resource-controller.).
> It seems this patch doesn't need to handle page_group.
>
> Considering hierarchy, putting several kinds of features on one controller is
> not good, I think. Balbir, how do you think ?
>
I would tend to agree. With the memrlimit controller, can't we do this in user
space now? Figure out the overcommit value and based on that setup the memrlimit?
--
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