Re: [PATCH v2 0/4] memcg: Low-limit reclaim

[Roman Gushchin <klamm@yandex-team.ru>]

29.04.2014, 11:42, "Greg Thelen" <gthelen@google.com>:
> On Mon, Apr 28 2014, Roman Gushchin <klamm@yandex-team.ru> wrote:
>
>> ?28.04.2014, 16:27, "Michal Hocko" <mhocko@suse.cz>:
>>> ?The series is based on top of the current mmotm tree. Once the series
>>> ?gets accepted I will post a patch which will mark the soft limit as
>>> ?deprecated with a note that it will be eventually dropped. Let me know
>>> ?if you would prefer to have such a patch a part of the series.
>>>
>>> ?Thoughts?
>> ?Looks good to me.
>>
>> ?The only question is: are there any ideas how the hierarchy support
>> ?will be used in this case in practice?
>> ?Will someone set low limit for non-leaf cgroups? Why?
>>
>> ?Thanks,
>> ?Roman
>
> I imagine that a hosting service may want to give X MB to a top level
> memcg (/a) with sub-jobs (/a/b, /a/c) which may(not) have their own
> low-limits.
>
> Examples:
>
> case_1) only set low limit on /a. ?/a/b and /a/c may overcommit /a's
> ????????memory (b.limit_in_bytes + c.limit_in_bytes > a.limit_in_bytes).
>
> case_2) low limits on all memcg. ?But not overcommitting low_limits
> ????????(b.low_limit_in_in_bytes + c.low_limit_in_in_bytes <=
> ????????a.low_limit_in_in_bytes).

Thanks!

With use_hierarchy turned on it looks perfectly usable.

--
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: <a href=mailto:"dont@kvack.org"> email@kvack.org </a>