[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <20090713095209.d8b6e566.kamezawa.hiroyu@jp.fujitsu.com>
Date: Mon, 13 Jul 2009 09:52:09 +0900
From: KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki <kamezawa.hiroyu@...fujitsu.com>
To: "Vladislav D. Buzov" <vbuzov@...eddedalley.com>
Cc: Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Linux Containers Mailing List
<containers@...ts.linux-foundation.org>,
Dan Malek <dan@...eddedalley.com>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
Paul Menage <menage@...gle.com>,
Balbir Singh <balbir@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>, linux-mm@...ck.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/1] Memory usage limit notification addition to memcg
On Wed, 08 Jul 2009 18:43:48 -0700
"Vladislav D. Buzov" <vbuzov@...eddedalley.com> wrote:
> KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki wrote:
> > 2 points.
> > - Do we have to check this always we account ?
> >
> What are the options? Every N pages? How to select N?
>
I think you can reuse Balbir's softlimit event counter. (see v9.)
> > If this is true, "set limit" should be checked to guarantee this.
> > plz allow minus this for avoiding mess.
> Setting the memory controller cgroup limit and the notification
> threshold are two separate operations. There isn't any "mess," just some
> validation testing for reporting back to the source of the request. When
> changing the memory controller limit, we ensure the threshold limit is
> never allowed "negative." At most, the threshold limit will be equal the
> memory controller cgroup limit. Otherwise, the arithmetic and
> conditional tests during the operational part of the software becomes
> more complex, which we don't want.
>
Hmm, then, plz this interface put under "set_limit_mutex".
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