Re: clarification about misc controller and capacity vs. max

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



Hello,

On Tue, Nov 01, 2022 at 04:40:22PM +0000, Accardi, Kristen C wrote:
> I notice in the comments for the misc controller it is stated that the
> max limit can be more than actual total capacity, meaning that we can
> overcommit with the resource controlled by the misc controller.
> However, in the misc_cg_try_charge() code, the function will return -
> EBUSY if max limit will be crossed or total usage will be more than the
> capacity, which would seem to enforce total capacity as an upper limit
> in addition to max and not allow for overcommit. Can you provide some
> clarity on whether the resource consumption model for the misc
> controller should allow for overcommit?

I think what it's trying to say is that the sum of first level .max's can be
higher than the total capacity. e.g. Let's say you have 5 of this resource
and a hierarchy like the following.

        R - A - A'
          + B - B'
          \ C

It's valid to have A, B, C's max set to 4, 3, 2 respectively even if they
sum up to 9 which is larger than what's available in the system, 5 - ie. the
max limits are overcommitted for the resource.

Thanks.

-- 
tejun



[Index of Archives]     [Linux ARM Kernel]     [Linux ARM]     [Linux Omap]     [Fedora ARM]     [IETF Annouce]     [Security]     [Bugtraq]     [Linux OMAP]     [Linux MIPS]     [eCos]     [Asterisk Internet PBX]     [Linux API]     [Monitors]

  Powered by Linux