Thread (96 messages) 96 messages, 8 authors, 2012-08-08

Re: [PATCH 00/11] kmem controller for memcg: stripped down version

From: David Rientjes <rientjes@google.com>
Date: 2012-06-27 01:08:18
Also in: linux-mm, lkml

On Tue, 26 Jun 2012, Andrew Morton wrote:
mm, maybe.  Kernel developers tend to look at code from the point of
view "does it work as designed", "is it clean", "is it efficient", "do
I understand it", etc.  We often forget to step back and really
consider whether or not it should be merged at all.
It's appropriate for true memory isolation so that applications cannot 
cause an excess of slab to be consumed.  This allows other applications to 
have higher reservations without the risk of incurring a global oom 
condition as the result of the usage of other memcgs.

I'm not sure whether it would ever be appropriate to limit the amount of 
slab for an individual slab cache, however, instead of limiting the sum of 
all slab for a set of processes.  With cache merging in slub this would 
seem to be difficult to do correctly.

--
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>
Keyboard shortcuts
hback out one level
jnext message in thread
kprevious message in thread
ldrill in
Escclose help / fold thread tree
?toggle this help