From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mail6.bemta8.messagelabs.com (mail6.bemta8.messagelabs.com [216.82.243.55]) by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3C0F16B004A for ; Sun, 12 Jun 2011 21:31:07 -0400 (EDT) Received: from m2.gw.fujitsu.co.jp (unknown [10.0.50.72]) by fgwmail6.fujitsu.co.jp (Postfix) with ESMTP id 612663EE0B6 for ; Mon, 13 Jun 2011 10:31:03 +0900 (JST) Received: from smail (m2 [127.0.0.1]) by outgoing.m2.gw.fujitsu.co.jp (Postfix) with ESMTP id 493B245DF2C for ; Mon, 13 Jun 2011 10:31:03 +0900 (JST) Received: from s2.gw.fujitsu.co.jp (s2.gw.fujitsu.co.jp [10.0.50.92]) by m2.gw.fujitsu.co.jp (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2D79745DF28 for ; Mon, 13 Jun 2011 10:31:03 +0900 (JST) Received: from s2.gw.fujitsu.co.jp (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by s2.gw.fujitsu.co.jp (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1FE1F1DB8038 for ; Mon, 13 Jun 2011 10:31:03 +0900 (JST) Received: from ml14.s.css.fujitsu.com (ml14.s.css.fujitsu.com [10.240.81.134]) by s2.gw.fujitsu.co.jp (Postfix) with ESMTP id E047F1DB803C for ; Mon, 13 Jun 2011 10:31:02 +0900 (JST) Date: Mon, 13 Jun 2011 10:23:58 +0900 From: KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki Subject: Re: [BUGFIX][PATCH] memcg: fix wrong decision of noswap with softlimit. Message-Id: <20110613102358.95637755.kamezawa.hiroyu@jp.fujitsu.com> In-Reply-To: <20110612112228.GC19493@tiehlicka.suse.cz> References: <20110609095445.5f98b752.kamezawa.hiroyu@jp.fujitsu.com> <20110612112228.GC19493@tiehlicka.suse.cz> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-linux-mm@kvack.org List-ID: To: Michal Hocko Cc: "linux-mm@kvack.org" , "linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" , "akpm@linux-foundation.org" , "nishimura@mxp.nes.nec.co.jp" , "bsingharora@gmail.com" On Sun, 12 Jun 2011 13:22:28 +0200 Michal Hocko wrote: > Hierarchical reclaim doesn't swap out if memsw and resource limits are > same (memsw_is_minimum == true) because we would hit mem+swap limit > anyway (during hard limit reclaim). > If it comes to the solft limit we shouldn't consider memsw_is_minimum at > all because it doesn't make much sense. Either the soft limit is bellow > the hard limit and then we cannot hit mem+swap limit or the direct > reclaim takes a precedence. Thank you. I'd like to use your description. I'll post last week bug fixes series, today. 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/ . Fight unfair telecom internet charges in Canada: sign http://stopthemeter.ca/ Don't email: email@kvack.org