[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <465FCCDB.5060008@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
Date: Fri, 01 Jun 2007 13:08:03 +0530
From: Balbir Singh <balbir@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>
To: Pavel Emelianov <xemul@...nvz.org>
CC: Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
Paul Menage <menage@...gle.com>,
Balbir Singh <balbir@...ibm.com>,
Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
devel@...nvz.org, Kirill Korotaev <dev@...nvz.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 7/8] Scanner changes needed to implement per-container
scanner
Pavel Emelianov wrote:
> Balbir Singh wrote:
>> Andrew Morton wrote:
>>>> + nr_reclaimed += shrink_zones(priority, zones, sc);
>>>> + if (sc->cnt == NULL)
>>>> + shrink_slab(sc->nr_scanned, gfp_mask, lru_pages);
>>> We don't we shrink slab if called to shrink a container.
>>>
>>> This is a fundamental design decision, and a design shortcoming. A full
>>> discussion of this is absolutely appropriate to the patch changelog.
>>> Please don't just hide stuff like this in the patch and leave people
>>> wondering, or ignorant.
>> Yes, we don't because we do not account for slab usage right now. We account
>> only for memory allocated to user space. A good fat comment will help here.
>>
>>
>
> I have already added the comment. But the problem is not in that we
> do not account for kernel memory. Shrinking slabs won't unmap any
> pages from user-space and thus won't help user to charge more. This
> will only make kernel suffer from re-creation of objects.
I meant the same thing. Thanks for adding the comment.
--
Warm Regards,
Balbir Singh
Linux Technology Center
IBM, ISTL
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists