Hello, Michal, Glauber. On Wed, Sep 26, 2012 at 04:03:47PM +0200, Michal Hocko wrote: > Haven't we already discussed that a new memcg should inherit kmem_accounted > from its parent for use_hierarchy? > Say we have > root > | > A (kmem_accounted = 1, use_hierachy = 1) > \ > B (kmem_accounted = 0) > \ > C (kmem_accounted = 1) > > B find's itself in an awkward situation becuase it doesn't want to > account u+k but it ends up doing so becuase C. Do we really want this level of flexibility? What's wrong with a global switch at the root? I'm not even sure we want this to be optional at all. The only reason I can think of is that it might screw up some configurations in use which are carefully crafted to suit userland-only usage but for that isn't what we need a transition plan rather than another ultra flexible config option that not many really understand the implication of? In the same vein, do we really need both .kmem_accounted and config option? If someone is turning on MEMCG, just include kmem accounting. Thanks. -- tejun -- 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>