Re: [PATCH v9 1/9] Basic kernel memory functionality for the Memory Controller

[Greg Thelen]

On Sun, Dec 11, 2011 at 11:47 PM, Glauber Costa <glommer@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> +Memory limits as specified by the standard Memory Controller may or may not
> +take kernel memory into consideration. This is achieved through the file
> +memory.independent_kmem_limit. A Value different than 0 will allow for kernel

s/Value/value/

It is probably worth documenting the default value for
memory.independent_kmem_limit?  I figure it would be zero at root and
and inherited from parents.  But I think the implementation differs.

> @@ -277,6 +281,11 @@ struct mem_cgroup {
>         */
>        unsigned long   move_charge_at_immigrate;
>        /*
> +        * Should kernel memory limits be stabilished independently
> +        * from user memory ?
> +        */
> +       int             kmem_independent_accounting;

I have no serious objection, but a full int seems like overkill for a
boolean value.

> +static int register_kmem_files(struct cgroup *cont, struct cgroup_subsys *ss)
> +{
> +       int ret = 0;
> +
> +       ret = cgroup_add_files(cont, ss, kmem_cgroup_files,
> +                              ARRAY_SIZE(kmem_cgroup_files));
> +       return ret;

If you want to this function could be condensed down to:
  return cgroup_add_files(...);
--
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/