On Wed, 10 Sep 2008 08:32:15 -0700 Balbir Singh <balbir@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > YAMAMOTO Takashi wrote: > > hi, > > > >> hi, > >> > >> here's a patch to implement memory.min_usage, > >> which controls the minimum memory usage for a cgroup. > >> > >> it works similarly to mlock; > >> global memory reclamation doesn't reclaim memory from > >> cgroups whose memory usage is below the value. > >> setting it too high is a dangerous operation. > >> > > Looking through the code I am a little worried, what if every cgroup is below > minimum value and the system is under memory pressure, do we OOM, while we could > have easily reclaimed? > > I would prefer to see some heuristics around such a feature, mostly around the > priority that do_try_to_free_pages() to determine how desperate we are for > reclaiming memory. > Taking "priority" of memory reclaim path into account is good. == static unsigned long shrink_inactive_list(unsigned long max_scan, struct zone *zone, struct scan_control *sc, int priority, int file) == How about ignore min_usage if "priority < DEF_PRIORITY - 2" ? Thanks, -Kame _______________________________________________ Containers mailing list Containers@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://lists.linux-foundation.org/mailman/listinfo/containers