On Fri, 12 Mar 2010, KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki wrote:
> A small concern here.
>
> +u64 mem_cgroup_get_limit(struct mem_cgroup *memcg)
> +{
> + return res_counter_read_u64(&memcg->memsw, RES_LIMIT);
> +}
>
> Because memory cgroup has 2 limit controls as "memory" and "memory+swap",
> a user may set only "memory" limitation. (Especially on swapless system.)
> Then, memcg->memsw limit can be infinite in some situation.
>
> So, how about this ? (just an idea after breif thinking..)
>
> u64 mem_cgroup_get_memsw_limit(struct mem_cgroup *memcg)
> {
> u64 memlimit, memswlimit;
>
> memlimit = res_counter_read_u64(&memcg->res, RES_LIMIT);
> memswlimit = res_counter_read_u64(&memcg->memsw, RES_LIMIT);
> if (memlimit + total_swap_pages > memswlimit)
> return memswlimit;
> return memlimit + total_swap_pages;
> }
>
I definitely trust your judgment when it comes to memcg, so this is how I
implemented it for v4.
Is the memcg->memsw RES_LIMIT not initialized to zero for swapless systems
or when users don't set a value? In other words, is this the optimal way
to determine how much resident memory and swap that current's memcg is
allowed?
--
To unsubscribe, send a message with 'unsubscribe linux-mm' in
the body to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxx For more info on Linux MM,
see: http://www.linux-mm.org/ .
Don't email: <a href=mailto:"dont@xxxxxxxxx";> email@xxxxxxxxx </a>