From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Subject: Re: [PATCH][RFC] dirty balancing for cgroups In-Reply-To: Your message of "Fri, 11 Jul 2008 16:13:49 +0900" <20080711161349.c5831081.kamezawa.hiroyu@jp.fujitsu.com> References: <20080711161349.c5831081.kamezawa.hiroyu@jp.fujitsu.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: Text/Plain; charset=us-ascii Message-Id: <20080711083446.AC5425A22@siro.lan> Date: Fri, 11 Jul 2008 17:34:46 +0900 (JST) From: yamamoto@valinux.co.jp (YAMAMOTO Takashi) Sender: owner-linux-mm@kvack.org Return-Path: To: kamezawa.hiroyu@jp.fujitsu.com Cc: linux-mm@kvack.org, menage@google.com, containers@lists.linux-foundation.org, a.p.zijlstra@chello.nl, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org List-ID: hi, > > my patch penalizes heavy-writer cgroups as task_dirty_limit does > > for heavy-writer tasks. i don't think that it's necessary to be > > tied to the memory subsystem because i merely want to group writers. > > > Hmm, maybe what I need is different from this ;) > Does not seem to be a help for memory reclaim under memcg. to implement what you need, i think that we need to keep track of the numbers of dirty-pages in each memory cgroups as a first step. do you agree? YAMAMOTO Takashi -- 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