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
| ||
|
Date: Wed, 3 Jun 2009 14:01:02 +0900 From: Daisuke Nishimura <nishimura@....nes.nec.co.jp> To: KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki <kamezawa.hiroyu@...fujitsu.com> Cc: LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, linux-mm <linux-mm@...ck.org>, Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>, Balbir Singh <balbir@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>, Li Zefan <lizf@...fujitsu.com>, Paul Menage <menage@...gle.com>, Daisuke Nishimura <nishimura@....nes.nec.co.jp> Subject: Re: [PATCH mmotm 2/2] memcg: allow mem.limit bigger than memsw.limit iff unlimited On Wed, 3 Jun 2009 12:52:28 +0900, KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki <kamezawa.hiroyu@...fujitsu.com> wrote: > On Wed, 3 Jun 2009 11:50:27 +0900 > Daisuke Nishimura <nishimura@....nes.nec.co.jp> wrote: > > > Now users cannot set mem.limit bigger than memsw.limit. > > This patch allows mem.limit bigger than memsw.limit iff mem.limit==unlimited. > > > > By this, users can set memsw.limit without setting mem.limit. > > I think it's usefull if users want to limit memsw only. > > They must set mem.limit first and memsw.limit to the same value now for this purpose. > > They can save the first step by this patch. > > > > I don't like this. No benefits to users. > The user should know when they set memsw.limit they have to set memory.limit. > This just complicates things. > Hmm, I think there is a user who cares only limitting logical memory(mem+swap), not physical memory, and wants kswapd to reclaim physical memory when congested. At least, I'm a such user. Do you disagree even if I add a file like "memory.allow_limit_memsw_only" ? Thanks, Daisuke Nishimura. > If you want to do this, add an interface as > memory.all.limit_in_bytes (or some better name) > and allow to set memory.limit and memory.memsw.limit _at once_. > > But I'm not sure it's worth to try. Saving user's few steps by the kenerl patch ? > > Thanks, > -Kame > > -- 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