From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1756187AbZCCS44 (ORCPT ); Tue, 3 Mar 2009 13:56:56 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1752915AbZCCS4s (ORCPT ); Tue, 3 Mar 2009 13:56:48 -0500 Received: from smtp3.ultrahosting.com ([74.213.175.254]:42360 "EHLO smtp.ultrahosting.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-FAIL) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1752249AbZCCS4s (ORCPT ); Tue, 3 Mar 2009 13:56:48 -0500 Date: Tue, 3 Mar 2009 13:46:52 -0500 (EST) From: Christoph Lameter X-X-Sender: cl@qirst.com To: David Rientjes cc: Pekka Enberg , Andrew Morton , Paul Menage , Randy Dunlap , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [patch 2/2] slub: enforce cpuset restrictions for cpu slabs In-Reply-To: Message-ID: References: User-Agent: Alpine 1.10 (DEB 962 2008-03-14) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Tue, 3 Mar 2009, David Rientjes wrote: > There is no alternative solution to prevent egregious amounts of slab to > be allocated in a disjoint cpuset that is supposedly mem_exclusive. The amount of memory is limited by the size of a slab page. If the process goes beyond that amount then the page allocator will come in and enforce the boundaries.