From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mail137.messagelabs.com (mail137.messagelabs.com [216.82.249.19]) by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 59B5F6B0069 for ; Mon, 7 Nov 2011 17:38:20 -0500 (EST) Received: by ggnh4 with SMTP id h4so7541489ggn.14 for ; Mon, 07 Nov 2011 14:38:17 -0800 (PST) MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <4EB8586B.5060804@jp.fujitsu.com> References: <1320614101.3226.5.camel@offbook> <20111107112952.GB25130@tango.0pointer.de> <1320675607.2330.0.camel@offworld> <20111107135823.3a7cdc53@lxorguk.ukuu.org.uk> <20111107143010.GA3630@tango.0pointer.de> <4EB8586B.5060804@jp.fujitsu.com> From: Kay Sievers Date: Mon, 7 Nov 2011 23:37:56 +0100 Message-ID: Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH] tmpfs: support user quotas Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Sender: owner-linux-mm@kvack.org List-ID: To: KOSAKI Motohiro Cc: mzxreary@0pointer.de, alan@lxorguk.ukuu.org.uk, dave@gnu.org, hch@infradead.org, hughd@google.com, akpm@linux-foundation.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-mm@kvack.org On Mon, Nov 7, 2011 at 23:15, KOSAKI Motohiro wrote: > (11/7/2011 6:30 AM), Lennart Poettering wrote: > If you want per-user limitation, RLIMIT is bad idea. RLIMIT is only inherited > by fork. So, The api semantics clearly mismatch your usecase. Like RLIMIT_NPROC? > Instead, I suggest to implement new sysfs knob. Where would users show up in sysfs? Kay -- 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