From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Balbir Singh Subject: Re: [RFC][-mm] Memory controller hierarchy support (v1) Date: Sun, 20 Apr 2008 13:13:57 +0530 Message-ID: <480AF43D.1090405@linux.vnet.ibm.com> References: <20080419053551.10501.44302.sendpatchset@localhost.localdomain> <4809CDB7.3000105@openvz.org> Reply-To: balbir@linux.vnet.ibm.com Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: In-Reply-To: <4809CDB7.3000105@openvz.org> Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org To: Pavel Emelyanov Cc: Paul Menage , YAMAMOTO Takashi , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-mm@kvack.org, containers@lists.osdl.org, KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki List-Id: containers.vger.kernel.org Pavel Emelyanov wrote: > > Are you going to split this patch? As is it looks rather huge :) > Sure >> TODO's/Open Questions >> >> 1. We need to hold cgroup_mutex while walking through the children >> in reclaim. We need to figure out the best way to do so. Should >> cgroups provide a helper function/macro for it? >> 2. Do not allow children to have a limit greater than their parents. >> 3. Allow the user to select if hierarchial support is required >> 4. Fine tune reclaim from children logic >> > > I though about it recently. Can we have a cgroup file, which will > control whether to attach a res_counter to the parent? This will > address the YEMEMOTO's question about the performance. > It's one of the TODOS -- Warm Regards, Balbir Singh Linux Technology Center IBM, ISTL