On 05-Jun 07:44, Tejun Heo wrote:

Hello,

Hi,

On Wed, Jun 05, 2019 at 03:39:50PM +0100, Patrick Bellasi wrote:

quoted

Which means we will enforce the effective values as:

   /tg1/tg11:

         util_min.effective=0
            i.e. keep the child protection since smaller than parent

         util_max.effective=800
            i.e. keep parent limit since stricter than child

Please shout if I got it wrong, otherwise I'll update v10 to
implement the above logic.

Everything sounds good to me.  Please note that cgroup interface files
actually use literal "max" for limit/protection max settings so that 0
and "max" mean the same things for all limit/protection knobs.

Lemme see if I've got it right, do you mean that we can:

 1) write the _string_ "max" into a cgroup attribute to:

    - set    0 for util_max, since it's a protection
    - set 1024 for util_min, since it's a limit

 2) write the _string_ "0" into a cgroup attribute to:

    - set 1024 for util_max, since it's a protection
    - set    0 for util_min, since it's a limit

Is that correct or it's just me totally confused?

Thanks.

--
tejun

Cheers,
Patrick

-- 
#include <best/regards.h>

Patrick Bellasi