Re: [RFC][PATCH 1/5] memcg: change for softlimit.

[KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki]

Balbir Singh wrote:
> * KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki <kamezawa.hiroyu@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> [2009-08-28
> 16:35:23]:
>

>>
>> Current soft-limit RB-tree will be easily broken i.e. not-sorted
>> correctly
>> if used under use_hierarchy=1.
>>
>
> Not true, I think the sorted-ness is delayed and is seen when we pick
> a tree for reclaim. Think of it as being lazy :)
>
plz explain how enexpectedly unsorted RB-tree can work sanely.


>> My patch disallows set softlimit to Bob and Mike, just allows against
>> Gold
>> because there can be considered as the same class, hierarchy.
>>
>
> But Bob and Mike might need to set soft limits between themselves. if
> soft limit of gold is 1G and bob needs to be close to 750M and mike
> 250M, how do we do it without supporting what we have today?
>
Don't use hierarchy or don't use softlimit.
(I never think fine-grain  soft limit can be useful.)

Anyway, I have to modify unnecessary hacks for res_counter of softlimit.
plz allow modification. that's bad.
I postpone RB-tree breakage problem, plz explain it or fix it by yourself.

Thanks,
-Kame

--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/