[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <48EB3B58.9010106@gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 07 Oct 2008 12:35:04 +0200
From: Andrea Righi <righi.andrea@...il.com>
To: KOSAKI Motohiro <kosaki.motohiro@...fujitsu.com>
CC: Michael Rubin <mrubin@...gle.com>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
dradford@...ehost.com, m.innocenti@...eca.it,
fernando@....ntt.co.jp, containers@...ts.linux-foundation.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, chlunde@...g.uio.no,
dave@...ux.vnet.ibm.com, dpshah@...gle.com, agk@...rceware.org,
matt@...ehost.com, menage@...gle.com, eric.rannaud@...il.com,
balbir@...ux.vnet.ibm.com
Subject: Re: [RFC] [PATCH -mm 0/2] memcg: per cgroup dirty_ratio
KOSAKI Motohiro wrote:
>> Currently the problem we are hitting is that we cannot specify pdflush
>> to have background limits less than 1% of memory. I am currently
>> finishing up a patch right now that adds a dirty_ratio_millis
>> interface. I hope to submit the patch to LKML by the end of the week.
>>
>> The idea is that we don't want to break backwards compatibility and we
>> also don't want to have two conflicting knobs in the sysctl or
>> /proc/sys/vm/ space. I thought adding a new knob for those who want to
>> specify finer grained functionality was a compromise. So the patch has
>> a vm_dirty_ratio and a vm_dirty_ratio_millis interface. The first to
>> specify 0-100% and the second to specify .0 to .999%.
>>
>> So to represent 0.125% of RAM we set
>> vm_dirty_ratio = 0
>> vm_dirty_ratio_millis = 125
>>
>> The same for the background_ratio.
>
> Why vm_dirty_ratio = 0.125 is wrong?
> it is hardly for parser maker, but it have nicer user experience.
>
>> I would also prefer using a bytes interface but I am not sure how to
>> offer that without either removing the legacy interface of the ratios
>> or by offering a concurrent interface that might be confusing such as
>> when users are looking at the old one and not aware of a new one.
>>
>> Any feedback?
>
> Sure.
> We don't have any motivation of its interface change.
The more I think about this and the more I would prefer to have an
interface in KB (or pages) that automatically adjusts the old int percentage
in dirty_ratio (the same for dirty_background_ratio).
The parser issue for writing decimal values doesn't seem to be a big
problem, but if the user expects to read an int from vm_dirty_ratio and
instead receives something like 0.125, well... this could break
something. So, IMHO also in this way we're changing the kernel-userspace
interface.
-Andrea
--
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