Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1755694AbZGNTKM (ORCPT ); Tue, 14 Jul 2009 15:10:12 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1753839AbZGNTKL (ORCPT ); Tue, 14 Jul 2009 15:10:11 -0400 Received: from easi.embeddedalley.com ([71.6.201.124]:47788 "HELO easi.embeddedalley.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with SMTP id S1753665AbZGNTKK (ORCPT ); Tue, 14 Jul 2009 15:10:10 -0400 In-Reply-To: <20090714100440.6283.A69D9226@jp.fujitsu.com> References: <20090708095616.cdfe8c7c.kamezawa.hiroyu@jp.fujitsu.com> <6599ad830907131515h3c9622b5v309cf8f13d272bab@mail.gmail.com> <20090714100440.6283.A69D9226@jp.fujitsu.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v753.1) Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed Message-Id: <9B7C6FE2-D946-4286-9537-C4A715997B89@embeddedalley.com> Cc: Paul Menage , KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki , Vladislav Buzov , Linux Kernel Mailing List , Linux Containers Mailing List , Andrew Morton , Balbir Singh Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit From: Dan Malek Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/1] Memory usage limit notification addition to memcg Date: Tue, 14 Jul 2009 12:13:32 -0700 To: KOSAKI Motohiro X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.753.1) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 2093 Lines: 58 On Jul 13, 2009, at 6:43 PM, KOSAKI Motohiro wrote: > I like multiple threshold and per-thresold file-descriptor. > it solve multiple waiters issue. > > but How about this? > > /cgroup > /group1 > /notifications > /threashold-A > /threashold-B Why are you making this so complicated? As a group, there is a limit and a notification threshold. Use the power of the cgroup hierarchy if you want something with related limits and different thresholds. I don't understand the system design that would desire group cooperation but yet different threshold notifications, except in the case of upper/lower limits. I'm not arguing you can't do it, but the value in doing so. The complexity of the event delivery will cause extensive discussion as well. You have great ideas but scratch just a little below the surface and there are complex problems to solve. For example, if you have a "below limit" notification I can think of many challenges to solve. Do you constantly deliver the event? Only once on crossing? At some time interval? How often? On a new attach to the event? Hysteresis? How do you control these? The purpose of this memory notification was to improve upon a previous attempt at such a feature. It's a useful feature that is today being used in some applications to successfully manage the constrained resource. If you look at my presentation from the last ELC, you will see this patch is one small step of many to improve resource management. This event notification discussion is important, but still just a tiny implementation detail in a bigger resource management scheme. We need to make the small steps to make people aware of new features, write applications that utilize these features, and to perhaps discover something even better we aren't even considering. Thanks. -- Dan -- 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/