[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <20101029164835.06eef3cf.kamezawa.hiroyu@jp.fujitsu.com>
Date: Fri, 29 Oct 2010 16:48:35 +0900
From: KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki <kamezawa.hiroyu@...fujitsu.com>
To: Greg Thelen <gthelen@...gle.com>
Cc: Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-mm@...ck.org,
containers@...ts.osdl.org, Andrea Righi <arighi@...eler.com>,
Balbir Singh <balbir@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>,
Daisuke Nishimura <nishimura@....nes.nec.co.jp>,
Minchan Kim <minchan.kim@...il.com>,
Ciju Rajan K <ciju@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>,
David Rientjes <rientjes@...gle.com>,
Wu Fengguang <fengguang.wu@...el.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 11/11] memcg: check memcg dirty limits in page
writeback
On Fri, 29 Oct 2010 00:09:14 -0700
Greg Thelen <gthelen@...gle.com> wrote:
> If the current process is in a non-root memcg, then
> balance_dirty_pages() will consider the memcg dirty limits
> as well as the system-wide limits. This allows different
> cgroups to have distinct dirty limits which trigger direct
> and background writeback at different levels.
>
> Signed-off-by: Andrea Righi <arighi@...eler.com>
> Signed-off-by: Greg Thelen <gthelen@...gle.com>
Acked-by: KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki <kamezawa.hiroyu@...fujitsu.com>
Ideally, I think some comments in the code for "why we need double-check system's
dirty limit and memcg's dirty limit" will be appreciated.
--
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