From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mail203.messagelabs.com (mail203.messagelabs.com [216.82.254.243]) by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix) with SMTP id B85F46B00C1 for ; Mon, 2 Mar 2009 00:36:38 -0500 (EST) Received: from m6.gw.fujitsu.co.jp ([10.0.50.76]) by fgwmail6.fujitsu.co.jp (Fujitsu Gateway) with ESMTP id n225aZtD030035 for (envelope-from kamezawa.hiroyu@jp.fujitsu.com); Mon, 2 Mar 2009 14:36:35 +0900 Received: from smail (m6 [127.0.0.1]) by outgoing.m6.gw.fujitsu.co.jp (Postfix) with ESMTP id 49EF745DE51 for ; Mon, 2 Mar 2009 14:36:35 +0900 (JST) Received: from s6.gw.fujitsu.co.jp (s6.gw.fujitsu.co.jp [10.0.50.96]) by m6.gw.fujitsu.co.jp (Postfix) with ESMTP id 28BD245DE4F for ; Mon, 2 Mar 2009 14:36:35 +0900 (JST) Received: from s6.gw.fujitsu.co.jp (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by s6.gw.fujitsu.co.jp (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1F9261DB8041 for ; Mon, 2 Mar 2009 14:36:35 +0900 (JST) Received: from m107.s.css.fujitsu.com (m107.s.css.fujitsu.com [10.249.87.107]) by s6.gw.fujitsu.co.jp (Postfix) with ESMTP id BE6411DB803A for ; Mon, 2 Mar 2009 14:36:34 +0900 (JST) Date: Mon, 2 Mar 2009 14:35:18 +0900 From: KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/4] Memory controller soft limit interface (v3) Message-Id: <20090302143518.43f5fcc2.kamezawa.hiroyu@jp.fujitsu.com> In-Reply-To: <20090302044631.GE11421@balbir.in.ibm.com> References: <20090301062959.31557.31079.sendpatchset@localhost.localdomain> <20090301063011.31557.42094.sendpatchset@localhost.localdomain> <20090302110323.1a9b9e6b.kamezawa.hiroyu@jp.fujitsu.com> <20090302044631.GE11421@balbir.in.ibm.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-linux-mm@kvack.org To: balbir@linux.vnet.ibm.com Cc: linux-mm@kvack.org, Sudhir Kumar , YAMAMOTO Takashi , Bharata B Rao , Paul Menage , lizf@cn.fujitsu.com, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, KOSAKI Motohiro , David Rientjes , Pavel Emelianov , Dhaval Giani , Rik van Riel , Andrew Morton List-ID: On Mon, 2 Mar 2009 10:16:31 +0530 Balbir Singh wrote: > * KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki [2009-03-02 11:03:23]: > > > On Sun, 01 Mar 2009 12:00:11 +0530 > > Balbir Singh wrote: > > > > > > > > From: Balbir Singh > > > > > > Changelog v2...v1 > > > 1. Add support for res_counter_check_soft_limit_locked. This is used > > > by the hierarchy code. > > > > > > Add an interface to allow get/set of soft limits. Soft limits for memory plus > > > swap controller (memsw) is currently not supported. Resource counters have > > > been enhanced to support soft limits and new type RES_SOFT_LIMIT has been > > > added. Unlike hard limits, soft limits can be directly set and do not > > > need any reclaim or checks before setting them to a newer value. > > > > > > Kamezawa-San raised a question as to whether soft limit should belong > > > to res_counter. Since all resources understand the basic concepts of > > > hard and soft limits, it is justified to add soft limits here. Soft limits > > > are a generic resource usage feature, even file system quotas support > > > soft limits. > > > > > I don't convice adding more logics to res_counter is a good to do, yet. > > > > Even though it is extensible and you pay the cost only when soft > limits is turned on? Can you show me why you are not convinced? > Inserting more codes (like "if") to res_counter itself is not welcome.. I think res_counter is too complex as counter already. I'm now searching a way to reduce res_counter->lock ping-pong but have no good idea. 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