Re: [RFC/PATCH] cgroup swap subsystem

[Pavel Emelyanov <xemul-GEFAQzZX7r8dnm+yROfE0A@public.gmane.org>]

Hugh Dickins wrote:
> On Wed, 5 Mar 2008, Pavel Emelyanov wrote:
>> Daisuke Nishimura wrote:
>>> Todo:
>>>   - rebase new kernel, and split into some patches.
>>>   - Merge with memory subsystem (if it would be better), or
>>>     remove dependency on CONFIG_CGROUP_MEM_CONT if possible
>>>     (needs to make page_cgroup more generic one).
>> Merge is a must IMHO. I can hardly imagine a situation in which
>> someone would need these two separately.
> 
> Strongly agree.  Nobody's interested in swap as such: it's just
> secondary memory, where RAM is primary memory.  People want to
> control memory as the sum of the two; and I expect they may also
> want to control primary memory (all that the current memcg does)
> within that.  I wonder if such nesting of limits fits easily
> into cgroups or will be problematic.

This nesting would affect the res_couter abstraction, not the
cgroup infrastructure. Current design of resource counters doesn't
allow for such thing, but the extension is a couple-of-lines patch :)

> Hugh
>