[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <20080819.214635.70071441.taka@valinux.co.jp>
Date: Tue, 19 Aug 2008 21:46:35 +0900 (JST)
From: Hirokazu Takahashi <taka@...inux.co.jp>
To: balbir@...ux.vnet.ibm.com
Cc: ryov@...inux.co.jp, kamezawa.hiroyu@...fujitsu.com,
xen-devel@...ts.xensource.com,
containers@...ts.linux-foundation.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
virtualization@...ts.linux-foundation.org, dm-devel@...hat.com,
agk@...rceware.org, xemul@...nvz.org, fernando@....ntt.co.jp
Subject: Re: [PATCH 4/7] bio-cgroup: Split the cgroup memory subsystem into
two parts
Hi,
> >> I'm now writing remove-lock-page-cgroup patches. it works well.
> >> please wait for a while...
> >
> > I'm looking forward to those patches.
> >
> > By the way, I'm glad if memory-cgroup has a feature which can make a
> > page_cgroup move between cgroups with small overhead. It makes
> > bio-cgroup improve the accuracy of tracking down pages.
>
> Page movement can be a very expensive operation and is proportional to the size
> of the control group. I think movement should be an optional feature, if we ever
> add it.
Yes, we should avoid moving pages as far as it is balanced fairly well
between groups.
But I want to move pages between bio-cgoups in case it started charging
quite a few I/O requests to a wrong bio-cgroup. I think it will be okay
if pages moves between bio-cgroups, but they don't need to move between
memory cgroups. I know the latter is really heavy and the effect seems
to be so limited.
Thanks,
Hirokazu Takahashi.
--
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