[lkml]   [2008]   [Jun]   [16]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
SubjectRe: Re: [PATCH 1/6] res_counter: handle limit change
----- Original Message -----

>> 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().
Slab_counter is a candidate. But ok, if everyone doesn't like this,
I'll abandon the whole and rewrite it as v3.

And condidering your point, my high-low-watermark patch set should be
implemented within memcg and adding high/low to res_counter is too bad.
I'll change my plan. But res_counter is less useful rather than I thought of ;
Besides it doesn't support any feedbacks, it just restricts the access to para

BTW, I believe current res_counter's behavior to return success
at usage > limit case is very bad. I'd like to return -EBUSY.
How do you think ?
(And I also think res_counter_charge returns -ENOMEM is BUG. It should be


 \ /
  Last update: 2008-06-16 15:31    [W:0.077 / U:0.088 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site