From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Date: Thu, 27 Mar 2008 18:14:04 +0900 From: KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki Subject: Re: [RFC][1/3] Add user interface for virtual address space control (v2) Message-Id: <20080327181404.1e95a725.kamezawa.hiroyu@jp.fujitsu.com> In-Reply-To: <20080326185006.9465.4720.sendpatchset@localhost.localdomain> References: <20080326184954.9465.19379.sendpatchset@localhost.localdomain> <20080326185006.9465.4720.sendpatchset@localhost.localdomain> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-linux-mm@kvack.org Return-Path: To: Balbir Singh Cc: Andrew Morton , Pavel Emelianov , Hugh Dickins , Sudhir Kumar , YAMAMOTO Takashi , Paul Menage , lizf@cn.fujitsu.com, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, taka@valinux.co.jp, linux-mm@kvack.org, David Rientjes List-ID: On Thu, 27 Mar 2008 00:20:06 +0530 Balbir Singh wrote: > > > Add as_usage_in_bytes and as_limit_in_bytes interfaces. These provide > control over the total address space that the processes combined together > in the cgroup can grow upto. This functionality is analogous to > the RLIMIT_AS function of the getrlimit(2) and setrlimit(2) calls. > A as_res resource counter is added to the mem_cgroup structure. The > as_res counter handles all the accounting associated with the virtual > address space accounting and control of cgroups. > > Signed-off-by: Balbir Singh I wonder that it's better to create "rlimit cgroup" rather than enhancing memory controller. (But I have no strong opinion.) How do you think ? Thanks, -Kame -- 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