[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20101003181044.GG7896@balbir.in.ibm.com>
Date: Sun, 3 Oct 2010 23:40:44 +0530
From: Balbir Singh <balbir@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>
To: Steve Magnani <steve@...idescorp.com>
Cc: David Howells <dhowells@...hat.com>, linux-mm@...ck.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, kamezawa.hiroyu@...fujitsu.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH][RESEND] nommu: add anonymous page memcg accounting
* Steve Magnani <steve@...idescorp.com> [2010-10-01 09:31:39]:
> David Howells <dhowells@...hat.com> wrote:
> >
> > Do we really need to do memcg accounting in NOMMU mode? Might it be
> > better to just apply the attached patch instead?
> >
> > David
> > ---
> > diff --git a/init/Kconfig b/init/Kconfig
> > index 2de5b1c..aecff10 100644
> > --- a/init/Kconfig
> > +++ b/init/Kconfig
> > @@ -555,7 +555,7 @@ config RESOURCE_COUNTERS
> >
> > config CGROUP_MEM_RES_CTLR
> > bool "Memory Resource Controller for Control Groups"
> > - depends on CGROUPS && RESOURCE_COUNTERS
> > + depends on CGROUPS && RESOURCE_COUNTERS && MMU
> > select MM_OWNER
> > help
> > Provides a memory resource controller that manages both anonymous
>
> If anything I think nommu is one of the better applications of memcg. Since nommu typically ==
> embedded, being able to put potential memory pigs in a sandbox so they can't destabilize the
> system is a Good Thing. That was my motivation for doing this in the first place and it works
> quite well.
Good to know, but I want to point out that I never explictly tested it
for NOMMU when I created memcg. I thought like the rest that not
having reclaim capability would limit memcg usage in the NOMMU world.
--
Three Cheers,
Balbir
--
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