[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20170710174857.GF7071@dhcp22.suse.cz>
Date: Mon, 10 Jul 2017 19:48:58 +0200
From: Michal Hocko <mhocko@...nel.org>
To: Jerome Glisse <jglisse@...hat.com>
Cc: linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-mm@...ck.org,
John Hubbard <jhubbard@...dia.com>,
David Nellans <dnellans@...dia.com>,
Dan Williams <dan.j.williams@...el.com>,
Balbir Singh <bsingharora@...il.com>,
Johannes Weiner <hannes@...xchg.org>,
Vladimir Davydov <vdavydov.dev@...il.com>,
cgroups@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 4/5] mm/memcontrol: allow to uncharge page without using
page->lru field
On Mon 10-07-17 12:54:21, Jerome Glisse wrote:
> On Mon, Jul 10, 2017 at 06:36:52PM +0200, Michal Hocko wrote:
> > On Mon 10-07-17 12:25:42, Jerome Glisse wrote:
> > [...]
> > > Bottom line is that we can always free and uncharge device memory
> > > page just like any regular page.
> >
> > OK, this answers my earlier question. Then it should be feasible to
> > charge this memory. There are still some things to handle. E.g. how do
> > we consider this memory during oom victim selection (this is not
> > accounted as an anonymous memory in get_mm_counter, right?), maybe others.
> > But the primary point is that nobody pins the memory outside of the
> > mapping.
>
> At this point it is accounted as a regular page would be (anonymous, file
> or share memory). I wanted mm_counters to reflect memcg but i can untie
> that.
I am not sure I understand. If the device memory is accounted to the
same mm counter as the original page then it is correct. I will try to
double check the implementation (hopefully soon).
--
Michal Hocko
SUSE Labs
Powered by blists - more mailing lists