From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mail138.messagelabs.com (mail138.messagelabs.com [216.82.249.35]) by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id BB64E6B00CD for ; Mon, 9 Mar 2009 03:51:37 -0400 (EDT) Received: from d28relay02.in.ibm.com (d28relay02.in.ibm.com [9.184.220.59]) by e28smtp05.in.ibm.com (8.13.1/8.13.1) with ESMTP id n297pVob006334 for ; Mon, 9 Mar 2009 13:21:31 +0530 Received: from d28av05.in.ibm.com (d28av05.in.ibm.com [9.184.220.67]) by d28relay02.in.ibm.com (8.13.8/8.13.8/NCO v9.2) with ESMTP id n297mNLZ4419618 for ; Mon, 9 Mar 2009 13:18:24 +0530 Received: from d28av05.in.ibm.com (loopback [127.0.0.1]) by d28av05.in.ibm.com (8.13.1/8.13.3) with ESMTP id n297pUWA023949 for ; Mon, 9 Mar 2009 18:51:30 +1100 Date: Mon, 9 Mar 2009 13:14:49 +0530 From: Balbir Singh Subject: Re: [RFC][PATCH 1/4] memcg: add softlimit interface and utilitiy function. Message-ID: <20090309074449.GH24321@balbir.in.ibm.com> Reply-To: balbir@linux.vnet.ibm.com References: <20090309163745.5e3805ba.kamezawa.hiroyu@jp.fujitsu.com> <20090309163907.a3cee183.kamezawa.hiroyu@jp.fujitsu.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20090309163907.a3cee183.kamezawa.hiroyu@jp.fujitsu.com> Sender: owner-linux-mm@kvack.org To: KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki Cc: "linux-mm@kvack.org" , "nishimura@mxp.nes.nec.co.jp" , "kosaki.motohiro@jp.fujitsu.com" List-ID: * KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki [2009-03-09 16:39:07]: > From: KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki > Adds an interface for defining sotlimit per memcg. (no handler in this patch.) > softlimit.priority and queue for softlimit is added in the next patch. > > > Changelog v1->v2: > - For refactoring, divided a patch into 2 part and this patch just > involves memory.softlimit interface. > - Removed governor-detect routine, it was buggy in design. > > Signed-off-by: KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki > --- > mm/memcontrol.c | 62 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++-- > 1 file changed, 60 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-) This patch breaks the semantics of resource counters. We would like to use resource counters to track all overhead. I've refined my tracking to an extent that the overhead does not show up at all, unless soft limits kick in. I oppose keeping soft limits outside of resource counters. -- Balbir -- To unsubscribe, send a message with 'unsubscribe linux-mm' in the body to majordomo@kvack.org. For more info on Linux MM, see: http://www.linux-mm.org/ . Don't email: email@kvack.org