[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.4.64.0811061151130.26541@blonde.site>
Date: Thu, 6 Nov 2008 11:59:58 +0000 (GMT)
From: Hugh Dickins <hugh@...itas.com>
To: KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki <kamezawa.hiroyu@...fujitsu.com>
cc: balbir@...ux.vnet.ibm.com,
"linux-mm@...ck.org" <linux-mm@...ck.org>,
"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
"menage@...gle.com" <menage@...gle.com>,
"nishimura@....nes.nec.co.jp" <nishimura@....nes.nec.co.jp>
Subject: Re: [RFC][PATCH 7/6] memcg: add atribute (for change bahavior of
rmdir)
On Thu, 6 Nov 2008, KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki wrote:
> On Thu, 06 Nov 2008 12:24:11 +0530
> Balbir Singh <balbir@...ux.vnet.ibm.com> wrote:
> > KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki wrote:
> > >
> > > 1. change force_empty to do move account rather than forget all
> >
> > I would like this to be selectable, please. We don't want to break behaviour and
> > not everyone would like to pay the cost of movement.
>
> How about a patch like this ? I'd like to move this as [2/7], if possible.
> It obviously needs painful rework. If I found it difficult, schedule this as [7/7].
>
> BTW, cost of movement itself is not far from cost for force_empty.
>
> If you can't find why "forget" is bad, please consider one more day.
My recollection from a year ago is that force_empty totally violated
the rules established elsewhere, making a nonsense of it all: once a
force_empty had been done, you couldn't really be sure of anything
(perhaps it deserved a Taint flag).
Without studying your proposals at all, I do believe you've a good
chance of creating a sensible and consistent force_empty by moving
account, and abandoning the old "forget all" approach completely.
Hugh
--
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