linux-kernel - Re: [RFC PATCH 2/2] memcg: add memory and swap knobs to the default cgroup hierarchy

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:	Mon, 29 Dec 2014 11:54:35 +0300
From:	Vladimir Davydov <vdavydov@...allels.com>
To:	Johannes Weiner <hannes@...xchg.org>
CC:	<linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, Michal Hocko <mhocko@...e.cz>,
	Greg Thelen <gthelen@...gle.com>, Tejun Heo <tj@...nel.org>,
	Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>, <linux-mm@...ck.org>
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH 2/2] memcg: add memory and swap knobs to the default
 cgroup hierarchy

On Sun, Dec 28, 2014 at 03:30:23PM -0500, Johannes Weiner wrote:
> As such, my proposals would be:
> 
>   memory.low:        the expected lower end of the workload size
>   memory.high:       the expected upper end
>   memory.max:        the absolute OOM-enforced maximum size
>   memory.current:    the current size
> 
> And then, in the same vein:
> 
>   swap.max
>   swap.current
> 
> These names are short, but they should be unambiguous and descriptive
> in their context, and users will have to consult the documentation on
> how to configure this stuff anyway.

To me, memory.max resembles memory.max_usage_in_bytes from the old
interface, which is confusing. However, if we forget about the old
interface, the new names look fine.

Thanks,
Vladimir
--
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/