On 09/27/2011 09:58 PM, KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki wrote:
On Mon, 26 Sep 2011 20:18:39 -0300
Glauber Costa<glommer@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
On 09/26/2011 07:34 AM, KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki wrote:
On Sun, 18 Sep 2011 21:56:39 -0300
Glauber Costa<glommer@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
"If parent sets use_hierarchy==1, children must have the same kmem_independent value
with parant's one."
How do you think ? I think a hierarchy must have the same config.
BTW, Kame:
Look again (I forgot myself when I first replied to you)
Only in the root cgroup those files get registered.
So shouldn't be a problem, because children won't even
be able to see them.
Do you agree with this ?
agreed.
Actually it is the other way around, following previous suggestions...
The root cgroup does *not* get those files registered, since we don't
intend to do any kernel memory limitation for it. The others get it.
Given that, I will proceed writing some code to respect parent cgroup's
hierarchy.
--
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/ .
Fight unfair telecom internet charges in Canada: sign http://stopthemeter.ca/
Don't email: <a href=mailto:"dont@xxxxxxxxx";> email@xxxxxxxxx </a>