[PATCH v3 09/11] memcg: add cgroupfs interface to memcg dirty limits

Daisuke Nishimura nishimura at mxp.nes.nec.co.jp
Tue Oct 19 20:46:59 PDT 2010


On Wed, 20 Oct 2010 12:31:10 +0900
Daisuke Nishimura <nishimura at mxp.nes.nec.co.jp> wrote:

> On Mon, 18 Oct 2010 17:39:42 -0700
> Greg Thelen <gthelen at google.com> wrote:
> 
> > Add cgroupfs interface to memcg dirty page limits:
> >   Direct write-out is controlled with:
> >   - memory.dirty_ratio
> >   - memory.dirty_limit_in_bytes
> > 
> >   Background write-out is controlled with:
> >   - memory.dirty_background_ratio
> >   - memory.dirty_background_limit_bytes
> > 
> > Other memcg cgroupfs files support 'M', 'm', 'k', 'K', 'g'
> > and 'G' suffixes for byte counts.  This patch provides the
> > same functionality for memory.dirty_limit_in_bytes and
> > memory.dirty_background_limit_bytes.
> > 
> > Signed-off-by: Andrea Righi <arighi at develer.com>
> > Signed-off-by: Balbir Singh <balbir at linux.vnet.ibm.com>
> > Signed-off-by: Greg Thelen <gthelen at google.com>
> 
> Acked-by: Daisuke Nishimura <nishimura at mxp.nes.nec.co.jp>
> 
> One question: shouldn't we return -EINVAL when writing to dirty(_background)_limit_bytes
> a bigger value than that of global one(if any) ? Or do you intentionally
> set the input value without comparing it with the global value ?
> But, hmm..., IMHO we should check it in __mem_cgroup_dirty_param() or something
> not to allow dirty pages more than global limit.
> 
Oh, Kamazawa-san has just send a fix for this problem :)
Please ignore this comment.

Thanks,
Daisuke Nishimura.


More information about the Containers mailing list