On Thu 23-06-22 18:03:31, Vasily Averin wrote: > Dear Michal, > do you still have any concerns about this patch set? Yes, I do not think we have concluded this to be really necessary. IIRC Roman would like to see lingering cgroups addressed in not-so-distant future (http://lkml.kernel.org/r/Ypd2DW7id4M3KJJW@carbon) and we already have a limit for the number of cgroups in the tree. So why should we chase after allocations that correspond the cgroups and somehow try to cap their number via the memory consumption. This looks like something that will get out of sync eventually and it also doesn't seem like the best control to me (comparing to an explicit limit to prevent runaways). -- Michal Hocko SUSE Labs
