KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki wrote: > On Mon, 19 Nov 2007 11:51:15 +0530 > Balbir Singh <balbir@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: >>> = >>> /cgroup/group_A/group_A_1 >>> . /group_A_2 >>> /group_A_3 >>> (LRU(s) will be used for maintaining parent/child groups.) >>> >> The LRU's will be shared, my vision is >> >> LRU >> ^ ^ >> | | >> Mem-----+ +----Mem >> >> >> That two or more mem_cgroup's can refer to the same LRU list and have >> their own resource counters. This setup will be used in the case >> of a hierarchy, so that a child can share memory with its parent >> and have it's own limit. >> >> The mem_cgroup will basically then only contain a reference >> to the LRU list. >> > Hmm, interesting. > > Then, > group_A_1's usage + group_A_2's usage + group_A_3's usgae < group_A's limit. > group_A_1, group_A_2, group_A_3 has its own limit. Yes that is correct > In plan. > > I wonder if we want rich control functions, we need "share" or "priority" among > childs. (but maybe this will be complicated one.) > That would nice and the end goal of providing this feature. We also need to provide soft-limits (more complex) and guarantees (with the kernel memory controller coming in - nice to have, but not necessary for now) > Thank you for explanation. > > Regards, > -Kame > Thanks for helping out the memory controller. -- Warm Regards, Balbir Singh Linux Technology Center IBM, ISTL _______________________________________________ Containers mailing list Containers@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://lists.linux-foundation.org/mailman/listinfo/containers
