[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 -----
>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 <>
>Does shrink_usage() really belong to res_counters? Could a task limiter, a
>CPU/IO bandwidth controller use this callback? Resource Counters were designe
>to be generic and work across controllers. Isn't the memory controller a bett
>place for such ops.
Definitely No. I think counters which cannot be shrink should return -EBUSY
by shrink_usage() when it cannot do it.


 \ /
  Last update: 2008-06-16 11:07    [W:0.207 / U:0.444 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site