Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1761508AbYFPJOf (ORCPT ); Mon, 16 Jun 2008 05:14:35 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1757792AbYFPJO1 (ORCPT ); Mon, 16 Jun 2008 05:14:27 -0400 Received: from sacred.ru ([62.205.161.221]:57480 "EHLO sacred.ru" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1757223AbYFPJO1 (ORCPT ); Mon, 16 Jun 2008 05:14:27 -0400 Message-ID: <48562B6B.4080000@openvz.org> Date: Mon, 16 Jun 2008 12:59:23 +0400 From: Pavel Emelyanov User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.14 (X11/20080421) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: balbir@linux.vnet.ibm.com CC: KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki , "linux-mm@kvack.org" , LKML , "menage@google.com" , "yamamoto@valinux.co.jp" , "nishimura@mxp.nes.nec.co.jp" , "lizf@cn.fujitsu.com" Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/6] res_counter: handle limit change References: <20080613182714.265fe6d2.kamezawa.hiroyu@jp.fujitsu.com> <20080613182924.c73fe9eb.kamezawa.hiroyu@jp.fujitsu.com> <48562AFF.9050804@linux.vnet.ibm.com> In-Reply-To: <48562AFF.9050804@linux.vnet.ibm.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Greylist: Sender succeeded SMTP AUTH authentication, not delayed by milter-greylist-3.0 (sacred.ru [62.205.161.221]); Mon, 16 Jun 2008 13:01:40 +0400 (MSD) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 1219 Lines: 28 Balbir Singh wrote: > KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki wrote: >> Add a support to shrink_usage_at_limit_change feature to res_counter. >> memcg will use this to drop pages. >> >> Change log: xxx -> v4 (new file.) >> - cut out the limit-change part from hierarchy patch set. >> - add "retry_count" arguments to shrink_usage(). This allows that we don't >> have to set the default retry loop count. >> - res_counter_check_under_val() is added to support subsystem. >> - res_counter_init() is res_counter_init_ops(cnt, NULL) >> >> Signed-off-by: KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki >> > > Does shrink_usage() really belong to res_counters? Could a task limiter, a > CPU/IO bandwidth controller use this callback? Resource Counters were designed > to be generic and work across controllers. Isn't the memory controller a better > place for such ops. Well, this was my point, I just couldn't express this in an understandable manner. We're discussing this right now :) -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/