[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <20081104143534.b5c16147.akpm@linux-foundation.org>
Date: Tue, 4 Nov 2008 14:35:34 -0800
From: Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>
To: Christoph Lameter <cl@...ux-foundation.org>
Cc: peterz@...radead.org, rientjes@...gle.com, npiggin@...e.de,
menage@...gle.com, dfults@....com, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
containers@...ts.osdl.org
Subject: Re: [patch 0/7] cpuset writeback throttling
On Tue, 4 Nov 2008 16:17:52 -0600 (CST)
Christoph Lameter <cl@...ux-foundation.org> wrote:
> On Tue, 4 Nov 2008, Andrew Morton wrote:
>
> > What are the alternatives here? What do we need to do to make
> > throttling a per-memcg thing?
>
> Add statistics to the memcg lru and then you need some kind of sets of
> memcgs that are represented by bitmaps or so attached to an inode.
>
> > The patchset is badly misnamed, btw. It doesn't throttle writeback -
> > in fact several people are working on IO bandwidth controllers and
> > calling this thing "writeback throttling" risks confusion.
>
> It is limiting dirty pages and throttling the dirty rate of applications
> in a NUMA system (same procedure as we do in non NUMA). The excessive
> dirtying without this patchset can cause OOMs to occur on NUMA systems.
yup.
To fix this with a memcg-based throttling, the operator would need to
be able to create memcg's which have pages only from particular nodes.
(That's a bit indirect relative to what they want to do, but is
presumably workable).
But do we even have that capability now?
--
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