On Wed, 17 Mar 2010, KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki wrote:
> > > 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?
> It's initalized to inifinite (-1UL).
>
Ah, that makes sense.
> > In other words, is this the optimal way
> > to determine how much resident memory and swap that current's memcg is
> > allowed?
> >
> I think so.
>
> It's guaranteed that
> mem->res.limit <= mem->memsw.limit
>
> Then, only when
> mem->res.limit + total_swap_pages > mem->memsw.limit
> memsw.limit works.
>
Ok, I'll use your suggestion and then it can be maintained in
mm/memcontrol.c for any future updates.
Thanks.
--
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>