Re: [PATCH mmotm 2/2] memcg: allow mem.limit bigger thanmemsw.limit iff unlimited

[Daisuke Nishimura]

On Wed, 3 Jun 2009 12:52:28 +0900, KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki <kamezawa.hiroyu@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> On Wed, 3 Jun 2009 11:50:27 +0900
> Daisuke Nishimura <nishimura@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> 
> > Now users cannot set mem.limit bigger than memsw.limit.
> > This patch allows mem.limit bigger than memsw.limit iff mem.limit==unlimited.
> > 
> > By this, users can set memsw.limit without setting mem.limit.
> > I think it's usefull if users want to limit memsw only.
> > They must set mem.limit first and memsw.limit to the same value now for this purpose.
> > They can save the first step by this patch.
> > 
> 
> I don't like this. No benefits to users.
> The user should know when they set memsw.limit they have to set memory.limit.
> This just complicates things.
> 
Hmm, I think there is a user who cares only limitting logical memory(mem+swap),
not physical memory, and wants kswapd to reclaim physical memory when congested. 
At least, I'm a such user.

Do you disagree even if I add a file like "memory.allow_limit_memsw_only" ?


Thanks,
Daisuke Nishimura.

> If you want to do this, add an interface as
>   memory.all.limit_in_bytes (or some better name)
> and allow to set memory.limit and memory.memsw.limit _at once_.
> 
> But I'm not sure it's worth to try. Saving user's few steps by the kenerl patch ?
> 
> Thanks,
> -Kame
> 
> 
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/