[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20171205155125.GS2421075@devbig577.frc2.facebook.com>
Date: Tue, 5 Dec 2017 07:51:25 -0800
From: Tejun Heo <tj@...nel.org>
To: Jeff Moyer <jmoyer@...hat.com>
Cc: Kirill Tkhai <ktkhai@...tuozzo.com>, axboe@...nel.dk,
bcrl@...ck.org, viro@...iv.linux.org.uk,
linux-block@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
linux-aio@...ck.org, oleg@...hat.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/5] blkcg: Limit maximum number of aio requests
available for cgroup
Hello, Jeff.
On Tue, Dec 05, 2017 at 10:41:11AM -0500, Jeff Moyer wrote:
> Kirill Tkhai <ktkhai@...tuozzo.com> writes:
>
> >> I think you just need to account the completion ring.
> >
> > A request of struct aio_kiocb type consumes much more memory, than
> > struct io_event does. Shouldn't we account it too?
>
> Not in my opinion. The completion ring is the part that gets pinned for
> long periods of time.
For memcg, it should account all possibly significant memory
consumptions whether long term or transitional. Otherwise, isolation
doesn't really work that well.
> Just be sure to document this where appropriate. Users/admins should
> know that the aio completion ring now contributes to their memory
> budget.
Yeah, the memory section in cgroup-v2.txt does have a section for
this.
Thanks.
--
tejun
Powered by blists - more mailing lists