From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Chris Down Subject: Re: [RFC 0/7] Introduce memory allocation speed throttle in memcg Date: Fri, 4 Jun 2021 12:51:00 +0100 Message-ID: References: Mime-Version: 1.0 Return-path: DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=chrisdown.name; s=google; h=date:from:to:cc:subject:message-id:references:mime-version :content-disposition:in-reply-to:user-agent; bh=nmP5AGQDJHyblHijhBlqQ7scqZzB+IznwgL38+TeSNM=; b=ZAlxWVBtcKxrDjkMXih764aGrC3O08Yb/bplxtTlgEtkni/fyJgyzoe3B8nvwoL2kj +4EaZPbiAzOhyGJyPs+QB3gqOY/lA5qhbBXOyrYwKIV16Taqm4Qfi6/spb3pKc255DS4 rmhTOzbc725b2O8qU5ltrkbJWQRadCm5lQl60= Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: List-ID: Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format="flowed" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit To: yulei zhang Cc: Shakeel Butt , Tejun Heo , Zefan Li , Johannes Weiner , Christian Brauner , Cgroups , benbjiang-1Nz4purKYjRBDgjK7y7TUQ@public.gmane.org, Wanpeng Li , Yulei Zhang , Linux MM , Michal Hocko , Roman Gushchin yulei zhang writes: >> Having a speed throttle is a very primitive knob: it's hard to know what the >> correct values are for a user. That's one of the reasons why we've moved away >> from that kind of tunable for blkio. >> >> Ultimately, if you want work-conserving behaviour, why not use memory.low? > >Thanks. But currently low and high are for cgroup v2 setting, do you >think we'd better >extend the same mechanism to cgroup v1? The cgroup v1 interface is frozen and in pure maintenance mode -- we're not adding new features there and haven't done so for some time.