From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Subject: Re: [RFC] mm-controller From: Peter Zijlstra In-Reply-To: <467BFA47.4050802@linux.vnet.ibm.com> References: <1182418364.21117.134.camel@twins> <467A5B1F.5080204@linux.vnet.ibm.com> <1182433855.21117.160.camel@twins> <467BFA47.4050802@linux.vnet.ibm.com> Content-Type: text/plain Date: Mon, 25 Jun 2007 18:22:41 +0200 Message-Id: <1182788561.6174.70.camel@lappy> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-linux-mm@kvack.org Return-Path: To: Vaidyanathan Srinivasan Cc: balbir@linux.vnet.ibm.com, Linux Kernel , Linux Containers , linux-mm , Balbir Singh , Pavel Emelianov , Paul Menage , Kirill Korotaev , devel@openvz.org, Andrew Morton , "Eric W. Biederman" , Herbert Poetzl , Roy Huang , Aubrey Li , riel@redhat List-ID: On Fri, 2007-06-22 at 22:05 +0530, Vaidyanathan Srinivasan wrote: > Merging both limits will eliminate the issue, however we would need > individual limits for pagecache and RSS for better control. There are > use cases for pagecache_limit alone without RSS_limit like the case of > database application using direct IO, backup applications and > streaming applications that does not make good use of pagecache. I'm aware that some people want this. However we rejected adding a pagecache limit to the kernel proper on grounds that reclaim should do a better job. And now we're sneaking it in the backdoor. If we're going to do this, get it in the kernel proper first. -- To unsubscribe, send a message with 'unsubscribe linux-mm' in the body to majordomo@kvack.org. For more info on Linux MM, see: http://www.linux-mm.org/ . Don't email: email@kvack.org