From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org>
Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand
	id S1753180AbcGSQ5a (ORCPT <rfc822;w@1wt.eu>);
	Tue, 19 Jul 2016 12:57:30 -0400
Received: from mail-lf0-f67.google.com ([209.85.215.67]:36480 "EHLO
	mail-lf0-f67.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org
	with ESMTP id S1751271AbcGSQ52 (ORCPT
	<rfc822;linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>);
	Tue, 19 Jul 2016 12:57:28 -0400
Subject: Re: [PATCH 02/14] resource limits: aggregate task highwater marks to
 cgroup level
To: Tejun Heo <tj@kernel.org>
References: <1468578983-28229-1-git-send-email-toiwoton@gmail.com>
 <1468578983-28229-3-git-send-email-toiwoton@gmail.com>
 <20160715141058.GI3078@mtj.duckdns.org>
 <f6f93ae6-48c4-bce9-08a2-5067919e8748@gmail.com>
 <20160718225249.GM3078@mtj.duckdns.org>
Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Jonathan Corbet <corbet@lwn.net>,
        Li Zefan <lizefan@huawei.com>, Johannes Weiner <hannes@cmpxchg.org>,
        Markus Elfring <elfring@users.sourceforge.net>,
        "David S. Miller" <davem@davemloft.net>,
        Nicolas Dichtel <nicolas.dichtel@6wind.com>,
        "open list:DOCUMENTATION" <linux-doc@vger.kernel.org>,
        "open list:CONTROL GROUP (CGROUP)" <cgroups@vger.kernel.org>
From: Topi Miettinen <toiwoton@gmail.com>
Openpgp: id=A0F2EB0D8452DA908BEC8E911CF9ADDBD610E936
Message-ID: <08d85be0-5ac7-d7ea-0fec-ceb3970f264b@gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 19 Jul 2016 16:57:10 +0000
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:45.0) Gecko/20100101
 Icedove/45.1.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <20160718225249.GM3078@mtj.duckdns.org>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
List-ID: <linux-kernel.vger.kernel.org>
X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org

On 07/18/16 22:52, Tejun Heo wrote:
> On Fri, Jul 15, 2016 at 05:15:41PM +0000, Topi Miettinen wrote:
>> There are clear semantics for the limits themselves, either they apply
>> per task or per user. It makes sense to gather values according to these
>> semantics. Then with systemd or other tools you can use the valuse to
>> set the limits for a service regardless if the limit applies per task or
>> per user and it works according to each limit's semantics.
> 
> What does it mean to collect the maximum of the high watermarks of
> multiple users or the high water marks along process hierarchy which
> is spread across multiple cgroups?  These are non-sensical numbers.
> If you want to collect high watermarks per-cgroup, the numbers have to
> be per-cgroup - how many fds are being used in that particular cgroup
> and what's the high watermark of that number and so on.  You can't
> just take maximum from process hierarchy or user watermarks.

Then there would need to be new limit checks at cgroup level. Would you
see problems with that approach?

-Topi