Messages in this thread | | | Date | Thu, 18 Nov 2010 17:53:34 +0900 | From | KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki <> | Subject | Re: [PATCH] Make swap accounting default behavior configurable |
| |
On Thu, 18 Nov 2010 17:46:54 +0900 Daisuke Nishimura <nishimura@mxp.nes.nec.co.jp> wrote:
> On Thu, 18 Nov 2010 09:23:32 +0100 > Michal Hocko <mhocko@suse.cz> wrote: > > > On Wed 17-11-10 12:28:01, Daisuke Nishimura wrote: > > > On Tue, 16 Nov 2010 17:12:25 -0800 > > > Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org> wrote: > > > > > > > On Wed, 17 Nov 2010 09:23:39 +0900 Daisuke Nishimura <nishimura@mxp.nes.nec.co.jp> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > diff --git a/Documentation/kernel-parameters.txt b/Documentation/kernel-parameters.txt > > > > > > > index ed45e98..14eafa5 100644 > > > > > > > --- a/Documentation/kernel-parameters.txt > > > > > > > +++ b/Documentation/kernel-parameters.txt > > > > > > > @@ -2385,6 +2385,9 @@ and is between 256 and 4096 characters. It is defined in the file > > > > > > > improve throughput, but will also increase the > > > > > > > amount of memory reserved for use by the client. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > + swapaccount [KNL] Enable accounting of swap in memory resource > > > > > > > + controller. (See Documentation/cgroups/memory.txt) > > > > > > > > > > > > So we have swapaccount and noswapaccount. Ho hum, "swapaccount=[1|0]" > > > > > > would have been better. > > > > > > > > > > > I suggested to keep "noswapaccount" for compatibility. > > > > > If you and other guys don't like having two parameters, I don't stick to > > > > > the old parameter. > > > > > > > > > > > > > Yes, we're stuck with the old one now. > > > > > > > > But we should note that "foo=[0|1]" is superior to "foo" and "nofoo". > > > > Even if we didn't initially intend to add "nofoo". > > > > > > > I see. > > > > > > Michal-san, could you update your patch to use "swapaccount=[1|0]" ? > > > > I have noticed that Andrew has already taken the last version of the > > patch for -mm tree. Should I still rework it to change swapaccount to > > swapaccount=0|1 resp. true|false? > > > It's usual to update a patch into more sophisticated one while it is in -mm tree. > So, I think you'd better to do it(btw, I prefer 0|1 to true|false. > Reading kernel-parameters.txt, 0|1 is more commonly used.). >
I vote for 0|1
Thanks, -Kame
| |