On Wed, 20 Oct 2010 23:35:15 +0900 Minchan Kim <minchan.kim@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > On Wed, Oct 20, 2010 at 02:02:55PM +0900, KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki wrote: > > Fixed one here. > > == > > From: KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki <kamezawa.hiroyu@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> > > > > Now, at calculating dirty limit, vm_dirty_param() is called. > > This function returns dirty-limit related parameters considering > > memory cgroup settings. > > > > Now, assume that vm_dirty_bytes=100M (global dirty limit) and > > memory cgroup has 1G of pages and 40 dirty_ratio, dirtyable memory is > > 500MB. > > > > In this case, global_dirty_limits will consider dirty_limt as > > 500 *0.4 = 200MB. This is bad...memory cgroup is not back door. > > > > This patch limits the return value of vm_dirty_param() considring > > global settings. > > > > Changelog: > > - fixed an argument "mem" int to u64 > > - fixed to use global available memory to cap memcg's value. > > > > Signed-off-by: KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki <kamezawa.hiroyu@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> > Reviewed-by: Minchan Kim <minchan.kim@xxxxxxxxx> > > It should have written this on Documentation. > "memcg dirty limit can't exceed global dirty limit" > Sure. Anyway we need review & rewrite Documenation after dirty limit merged. (I think Greg will do much.) Thanks, -Kame -- 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>