[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <alpine.DEB.2.00.1206271316070.22162@chino.kir.corp.google.com>
Date: Wed, 27 Jun 2012 13:21:27 -0700 (PDT)
From: David Rientjes <rientjes@...gle.com>
To: Tejun Heo <tj@...nel.org>
cc: Michal Hocko <mhocko@...e.cz>, Zhouping Liu <zliu@...hat.com>,
linux-mm@...ck.org, Li Zefan <lizefan@...wei.com>,
CAI Qian <caiqian@...hat.com>,
LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>
Subject: Re: memcg: cat: memory.memsw.* : Operation not supported
On Wed, 27 Jun 2012, Tejun Heo wrote:
> Yeah, it's kinda ugly. Taking a step back, do we really need be able
> to configure out memsw? How much vmlinux bloat or runtime overhead
> are we talking about? I don't think config options need to be this
> granular.
>
Well it also has a prerequisite that memcg doesn't have: CONFIG_SWAP, so
even if CONFIG_CGROUP_MEM_RES_CTLR_SWAP is folded into
CONFIG_CGROUP_MEM_RES_CTLR, then these should still depend on CONFIG_SWAP
since configuring them would imply there is some limit to be enforced.
But to answer your question:
text data bss dec hex filename
25777 3644 4128 33549 830d memcontrol.o.swap_disabled
27294 4476 4128 35898 8c3a memcontrol.o.swap_enabled
Is it really too painful to not create these files when
CONFIG_CGROUP_MEM_RES_CTLR_SWAP is disabled? If so, can we at least allow
them to be opened but return -EINVAL if memory.memsw.limit_in_bytes is
written?
--
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