[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <4FDFC4D4.1030303@jp.fujitsu.com>
Date: Tue, 19 Jun 2012 09:16:20 +0900
From: Kamezawa Hiroyuki <kamezawa.hiroyu@...fujitsu.com>
To: Glauber Costa <glommer@...allels.com>
CC: linux-mm@...ck.org, Pekka Enberg <penberg@...nel.org>,
Cristoph Lameter <cl@...ux.com>,
David Rientjes <rientjes@...gle.com>, cgroups@...r.kernel.org,
devel@...nvz.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
Frederic Weisbecker <fweisbec@...il.com>,
Suleiman Souhlal <suleiman@...gle.com>,
Pekka Enberg <penberg@...helsinki.fi>,
Michal Hocko <mhocko@...e.cz>,
Johannes Weiner <hannes@...xchg.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 23/25] memcg: propagate kmem limiting information to
children
(2012/06/18 21:43), Glauber Costa wrote:
> On 06/18/2012 04:37 PM, Kamezawa Hiroyuki wrote:
>> (2012/06/18 19:28), Glauber Costa wrote:
>>> The current memcg slab cache management fails to present satisfatory hierarchical
>>> behavior in the following scenario:
>>>
>>> -> /cgroups/memory/A/B/C
>>>
>>> * kmem limit set at A
>>> * A and B empty taskwise
>>> * bash in C does find /
>>>
>>> Because kmem_accounted is a boolean that was not set for C, no accounting
>>> would be done. This is, however, not what we expect.
>>>
>>
>> Hmm....do we need this new routines even while we have mem_cgroup_iter() ?
>>
>> Doesn't this work ?
>>
>> struct mem_cgroup {
>> .....
>> bool kmem_accounted_this;
>> atomic_t kmem_accounted;
>> ....
>> }
>>
>> at set limit
>>
>> ....set_limit(memcg) {
>>
>> if (newly accounted) {
>> mem_cgroup_iter() {
>> atomic_inc(&iter->kmem_accounted)
>> }
>> } else {
>> mem_cgroup_iter() {
>> atomic_dec(&iter->kmem_accounted);
>> }
>> }
>>
>>
>> hm ? Then, you can see kmem is accounted or not by atomic_read(&memcg->kmem_accounted);
>>
>
> Accounted by itself / parent is still useful, and I see no reason to use
> an atomic + bool if we can use a pair of bits.
>
> As for the routine, I guess mem_cgroup_iter will work... It does a lot
> more than I need, but for the sake of using what's already in there, I
> can switch to it with no problems.
>
Hmm. please start from reusing existing routines.
If it's not enough, some enhancement for generic cgroup will be welcomed
rather than completely new one only for memcg.
Thanks,
-Kame
--
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