On Fri, Jul 15, 2016 at 01:52:48PM +0000, Topi Miettinen wrote: > On 07/15/16 12:43, Peter Zijlstra wrote: > > On Fri, Jul 15, 2016 at 01:35:47PM +0300, Topi Miettinen wrote: > >> Hello, > >> > >> There are many basic ways to control processes, including capabilities, > >> cgroups and resource limits. However, there are far fewer ways to find out > >> useful values for the limits, except blind trial and error. > >> > >> This patch series attempts to fix that by giving at least a nice starting > >> point from the highwater mark values of the resources in question. > >> I looked where each limit is checked and added a call to update the mark > >> nearby. > > > > And how is that useful? Setting things to the high watermark is > > basically the same as not setting the limit at all. > > What else would you use, too small limits? That question doesn't make sense. What's the point of setting a limit if it ends up being the same as no-limit (aka unlimited). If you cannot explain; and you have not so far; what use these values are, why would we look at the patches. -- To unsubscribe, send a message with 'unsubscribe linux-mm' in the body to majordomo@xxxxxxxxx. For more info on Linux MM, see: http://www.linux-mm.org/ . Don't email: <a href=mailto:"dont@xxxxxxxxx";> email@xxxxxxxxx </a>