Re: [PATCH] RSS ulimit enforcement for 2.6.8

[Nick Piggin <nickpiggin@yahoo.com.au>]

Rik van Riel wrote:

>On Thu, 5 Aug 2004, Andrew Morton wrote:
>
>
>>Good question.  What I'm groping for here is some definition of what we
>>actually want the feature to _do_.  Once we have that, and have suitably
>>argued about it, we can then go off and see if the patch actually does it.
>>
>
>What I want the feature to do is allow users to set an
>RSS rlimit to prevent a process from hogging up all the
>machine's memory.
>
>I am not looking for a hard memory limit, since that
>would just cause extra IO, which has bad consequences
>for the rest of the system.
>
>In addition, I would like the patch to be relatively
>low impact, not giving us much maintenance overhead or
>much runtime overhead.
>
>If anybody has good reasons for needing hard per-process
>RSS limits, let us know.  So far I haven't seen anybody
>with a workload that somehow requires a hard limit.
>
>
FWIW, I like Rik's approach. One tiny request might be just to do the
patch underneath the thrashing control patch so it can be sent to Linus
earlier.