[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <d301eb31-9c95-60c2-3d41-fc2fcb53f2eb@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
Date: Thu, 23 Feb 2017 10:15:03 +0100
From: Laurent Dufour <ldufour@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>
To: Balbir Singh <bsingharora@...il.com>
Cc: Johannes Weiner <hannes@...xchg.org>,
Michal Hocko <mhocko@...nel.org>,
Vladimir Davydov <vdavydov.dev@...il.com>,
cgroups@...r.kernel.org, linux-mm@...ck.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/2] mm/cgroup: delay soft limit data allocation
On 23/02/2017 02:16, Balbir Singh wrote:
> On Wed, Feb 22, 2017 at 04:58:11PM +0100, Laurent Dufour wrote:
>> Until a soft limit is set to a cgroup, the soft limit data are useless
>> so delay this allocation when a limit is set.
>>
>> Suggested-by: Michal Hocko <mhocko@...nel.org>
>> Signed-off-by: Laurent Dufour <ldufour@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>
>> ---
> <snip>
>> @@ -3000,6 +3035,8 @@ static ssize_t mem_cgroup_write(struct kernfs_open_file *of,
>> }
>> break;
>> case RES_SOFT_LIMIT:
>> + if (!soft_limit_initialized)
>> + soft_limit_initialize();
>
> What happens if this fails? Do we disable this interface?
> It's a good idea, but I wonder if we can deal with certain
> memory cgroups not supporting soft limits due to memory
> shortage at the time of using them.
Thanks Balbir for the review.
Regarding this point, Michal sent a new proposal which will return
-ENOMEM in the case the initialization failed. I'll send a new series in
that way.
>
>> memcg->soft_limit = nr_pages;
>> ret = 0;
>> break;
>
> Balbir Singh.
>
Powered by blists - more mailing lists