[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20090406184221.GL7082@balbir.in.ibm.com>
Date: Tue, 7 Apr 2009 00:12:21 +0530
From: Balbir Singh <balbir@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>
To: KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki <kamezawa.hiroyu@...fujitsu.com>
Cc: "linux-mm@...ck.org" <linux-mm@...ck.org>,
"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
"kosaki.motohiro@...fujitsu.com" <kosaki.motohiro@...fujitsu.com>
Subject: Re: [RFC][PATCH 4/9] soft limit queue and priority
* KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki <kamezawa.hiroyu@...fujitsu.com> [2009-04-03 17:12:48]:
> From: KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki <kamezawa.hiroyu@...fujitsu.com>
>
> Softlimitq. for memcg.
>
> Implements an array of queue to list memcgs, array index is determined by
> the amount of memory usage excess the soft limit.
>
> While Balbir's one uses RB-tree and my old one used a per-zone queue
> (with round-robin), this is one of mixture of them.
> (I'd like to use rotation of queue in later patches)
>
> Priority is determined by following.
> Assume unit = total pages/1024. (the code uses different value)
> if excess is...
> < unit, priority = 0,
> < unit*2, priority = 1,
> < unit*2*2, priority = 2,
> ...
> < unit*2^9, priority = 9,
> < unit*2^10, priority = 10, (> 50% to total mem)
>
> This patch just includes queue management part and not includes
> selection logic from queue. Some trick will be used for selecting victims at
> soft limit in efficient way.
>
> And this equips 2 queues, for anon and file. Inset/Delete of both list is
> done at once but scan will be independent. (These 2 queues are used later.)
>
> Major difference from Balbir's one other than RB-tree is bahavior under
> hierarchy. This one adds all children to queue by checking hierarchical
> priority. This is for helping per-zone usage check on victim-selection logic.
>
> Changelog: v1->v2
> - fixed comments.
> - change base size to exponent.
> - some micro optimization to reduce code size.
> - considering memory hotplug, it's not good to record a value calculated
> from totalram_pages at boot and using it later is bad manner. Fixed it.
> - removed soft_limit_lock (spinlock)
> - added soft_limit_update counter for avoiding mulptiple update at once.
>
>
> Signed-off-by: KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki <kamezawa.hiroyu@...fujitsu.com>
> ---
> mm/memcontrol.c | 118 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++-
> 1 file changed, 117 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
>
> Index: softlimit-test2/mm/memcontrol.c
> ===================================================================
> --- softlimit-test2.orig/mm/memcontrol.c
> +++ softlimit-test2/mm/memcontrol.c
> @@ -192,7 +192,14 @@ struct mem_cgroup {
> atomic_t refcnt;
>
> unsigned int swappiness;
> -
> + /*
> + * For soft limit.
> + */
> + int soft_limit_priority;
> + struct list_head soft_limit_list[2];
Looking at the rest of the code in the patch, it is not apparent as to
why we need two list_heads/array of list_heads?
--
Balbir
--
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