From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Date: Wed, 28 May 2008 09:12:37 +0900 From: KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki Subject: Re: [RFC 1/4] memcg: drop pages at rmdir (v1) Message-Id: <20080528091237.f6bf2745.kamezawa.hiroyu@jp.fujitsu.com> In-Reply-To: <483C32AE.1020908@linux.vnet.ibm.com> References: <20080527140116.fb04b06b.kamezawa.hiroyu@jp.fujitsu.com> <20080527140533.b4b6f73f.kamezawa.hiroyu@jp.fujitsu.com> <483C32AE.1020908@linux.vnet.ibm.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-linux-mm@kvack.org Return-Path: To: balbir@linux.vnet.ibm.com Cc: "linux-mm@kvack.org" , "yamamoto@valinux.co.jp" , "xemul@openvz.org" , "lizf@cn.fujitsu.com" , "containers@lists.osdl.org" List-ID: On Tue, 27 May 2008 21:41:26 +0530 Balbir Singh wrote: > KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki wrote: > > Now, when we remove memcg, we call force_empty(). > > This call drops all page_cgroup accounting in this mem_cgroup but doesn't > > drop pages. So, some page caches can be remaind as "not accounted" memory > > while they are alive. (because it's accounted only when add_to_page_cache()) > > If they are not used by other memcg, global LRU will drop them. > > > > This patch tries to drop pages at removing memcg. Other memcg will > > reload and re-account page caches. (but this will increase page-in > > after rmdir().) > > > > The approach seems fair, but I am not sure about the overhead of flushing out > cached pages. Might well be worth it. > > > Consideration: should we recharge all pages to the parent at last ? > > But it's not precise logic. > > > > We should look into this - I should send out the multi-hierarchy patches soon. Yes. I'll write my version (if I can). please pick it up if you like it. > We should discuss this after that. > ok. I'd like to forget this patch for a while. Thanks, -Kame -- To unsubscribe, send a message with 'unsubscribe linux-mm' in the body to majordomo@kvack.org. For more info on Linux MM, see: http://www.linux-mm.org/ . Don't email: email@kvack.org