[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <CAOJsxLErFcxuuqnWkRbOAHEFbeGrKp3YMZ-144=m16oBXCHJ2g@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Mon, 15 Aug 2011 14:55:13 +0300
From: Pekka Enberg <penberg@...nel.org>
To: Pavel Emelyanov <xemul@...allels.com>
Cc: Dave Chinner <david@...morbit.com>,
Glauber Costa <glommer@...allels.com>,
"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
"linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org>,
"containers@...ts.linux-foundation.org"
<containers@...ts.linux-foundation.org>,
Al Viro <viro@...iv.linux.org.uk>,
Hugh Dickins <hughd@...gle.com>,
Nick Piggin <npiggin@...nel.dk>,
Andrea Arcangeli <aarcange@...hat.com>,
Rik van Riel <riel@...hat.com>,
Dave Hansen <dave@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>,
James Bottomley <jbottomley@...allels.com>,
Eric Dumazet <eric.dumazet@...il.com>,
Christoph Lameter <cl@...ux.com>,
David Rientjes <rientjes@...gle.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 3/4] limit nr_dentries per superblock
On Mon, Aug 15, 2011 at 2:32 PM, Pavel Emelyanov <xemul@...allels.com> wrote:
>> Couldn't you simply do per-container "struct kmem_accounted_cache" in struct superblock?
>
> If by this you mean "account for all the kmem associated with particular superblock" then
> this is OK for us, but this can't be done in a simple
>
> if (used + size > limit)
> return -ENOMEM
> else {
> used += size;
> return 0;
> }
>
> manner, since once we hit the limit we should shrink the unused dentries. And most of the
> patches are about this.
So you want to shrink dentries that were allocated in the container
that hit the dcache limit? How does this patch set deal with that? Or
are you referring to some other patches?
Pekka
--
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