Re: [PATCH 14/19] mm: Introduce a cgroup for pinned memory

[Tejun Heo]

On Mon, Feb 06, 2023 at 02:32:10PM -0800, Yosry Ahmed wrote:
> I guess it boils down to which we want:
> (a) Limit the amount of memory processes in a cgroup can be pinned/locked.
> (b) Limit the amount of memory charged to a cgroup that can be pinned/locked.
> 
> The proposal is doing (a), I suppose if this was part of memcg it
> would be (b), right?
> 
> I am not saying it should be one or the other, I am just making sure
> my understanding is clear.

I don't quite understand what the distinction would mean in practice. It's
just odd to put locked memory in a separate controller from interface POV.

Thanks.

-- 
tejun