Re: [RFC PATCH] cgroup: introduce proportional protection on memcg
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
- To: "zhaoyang.huang" <zhaoyang.huang@xxxxxxxxxx>
- Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH] cgroup: introduce proportional protection on memcg
- From: Chris Down <chris@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Thu, 24 Mar 2022 10:27:43 -0400
- Cc: Andrew Morton <akpm@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, Johannes Weiner <hannes@xxxxxxxxxxx>, Michal Hocko <mhocko@xxxxxxxxxx>, Vladimir Davydov <vdavydov.dev@xxxxxxxxx>, ke wang <ke.wang@xxxxxxxxxx>, Zhaoyang Huang <huangzhaoyang@xxxxxxxxx>, linux-mm@xxxxxxxxx, linux-kernel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, cgroups@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
- In-reply-to: <1648113743-32622-1-git-send-email-zhaoyang.huang@unisoc.com>
- References: <1648113743-32622-1-git-send-email-zhaoyang.huang@unisoc.com>
- User-agent: Mutt/2.2.1 (c8109e14) (2022-02-19)
I'm confused by the aims of this patch. We already have proportional reclaim
for memory.min and memory.low, and memory.high is already "proportional" by its
nature to drive memory back down behind the configured threshold.
Could you please be more clear about what you're trying to achieve and in what
way the existing proportional reclaim mechanisms are insufficient for you?
[Index of Archives]
[Linux ARM Kernel]
[Linux ARM]
[Linux Omap]
[Fedora ARM]
[IETF Annouce]
[Bugtraq]
[Linux OMAP]
[Linux MIPS]
[eCos]
[Asterisk Internet PBX]
[Linux API]