On Mon, Apr 01, 2013 at 01:09:09PM -0700, Tim Hockin wrote: > Pardon my ignorance, but... what? Use kernel memory limits as a proxy > for process/thread counts? That sounds terrible - I hope I am
Well, the argument was that process / thread counts were a poor and unnecessary proxy for kernel memory consumption limit. IIRC, Johannes put it as (I'm paraphrasing) "you can't go to Fry's and buy 4k thread worth of component". > misunderstanding? This task counter patch had several properties that > mapped very well to what we want. > > Is it dead in the water? After some discussion, Frederic agreed that at least his use case can be served well by kmemcg, maybe even better - IIRC it was container fork bomb scenario, so you'll have to argue your way in why kmemcg isn't a suitable solution for your use case if you wanna revive this. Thanks. -- tejun -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
