Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1757065AbZFCIsV (ORCPT ); Wed, 3 Jun 2009 04:48:21 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1752238AbZFCIsN (ORCPT ); Wed, 3 Jun 2009 04:48:13 -0400 Received: from fgwmail6.fujitsu.co.jp ([192.51.44.36]:38714 "EHLO fgwmail6.fujitsu.co.jp" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751515AbZFCIsN (ORCPT ); Wed, 3 Jun 2009 04:48:13 -0400 Date: Wed, 3 Jun 2009 17:46:41 +0900 From: KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki To: Daisuke Nishimura Cc: LKML , linux-mm , Andrew Morton , Balbir Singh , Li Zefan , Paul Menage Subject: Re: [PATCH mmotm 2/2] memcg: allow mem.limit bigger than memsw.limit iff unlimited Message-Id: <20090603174641.445e3012.kamezawa.hiroyu@jp.fujitsu.com> In-Reply-To: <20090603140102.72b04b6f.nishimura@mxp.nes.nec.co.jp> References: <20090603114518.301cef4d.nishimura@mxp.nes.nec.co.jp> <20090603115027.80f9169b.nishimura@mxp.nes.nec.co.jp> <20090603125228.368ecaf7.kamezawa.hiroyu@jp.fujitsu.com> <20090603140102.72b04b6f.nishimura@mxp.nes.nec.co.jp> Organization: FUJITSU Co. LTD. X-Mailer: Sylpheed 2.5.0 (GTK+ 2.10.14; i686-pc-mingw32) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 1839 Lines: 53 On Wed, 3 Jun 2009 14:01:02 +0900 Daisuke Nishimura wrote: > On Wed, 3 Jun 2009 12:52:28 +0900, KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki wrote: > > On Wed, 3 Jun 2009 11:50:27 +0900 > > Daisuke Nishimura 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" ? > How about removing memory.limit < memsw.limit condition completely ? Thanks, -Kame > > 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@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/