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