Messages in this thread |  | | Date | Mon, 16 Jun 2008 17:59:46 +0530 | From | Balbir Singh <> | Subject | Re: [PATCH 1/6] res_counter: handle limit change |
| |
kamezawa.hiroyu@jp.fujitsu.com wrote: > ----- Original Message ----- >> KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki wrote: >>> Add a support to shrink_usage_at_limit_change feature to res_counter. >>> memcg will use this to drop pages. >>> >>> Change log: xxx -> v4 (new file.) >>> - cut out the limit-change part from hierarchy patch set. >>> - add "retry_count" arguments to shrink_usage(). This allows that we don't >>> have to set the default retry loop count. >>> - res_counter_check_under_val() is added to support subsystem. >>> - res_counter_init() is res_counter_init_ops(cnt, NULL) >>> >>> Signed-off-by: KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki <kamezawa.hiroyu@jp.fujitsu.com> >>> >> Does shrink_usage() really belong to res_counters? Could a task limiter, a >> CPU/IO bandwidth controller use this callback? Resource Counters were designe > d >> to be generic and work across controllers. Isn't the memory controller a bett > er >> place for such ops. >> > Definitely No. I think counters which cannot be shrink should return -EBUSY > by shrink_usage() when it cannot do it.
Wouldn't that be all counters except for the memory controller RSS counter? I can't see anyone besides the memory controller supporting shrink_usage().
-- Warm Regards, Balbir Singh Linux Technology Center IBM, ISTL
|  |