From: KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki <kamezawa.hiroyu@jp.fujitsu.com>
To: balbir@linux.vnet.ibm.com
Cc: linux-mm@kvack.org, YAMAMOTO Takashi <yamamoto@valinux.co.jp>,
Paul Menage <menage@google.com>,
lizf@cn.fujitsu.com, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
Nick Piggin <nickpiggin@yahoo.com.au>,
David Rientjes <rientjes@google.com>,
Pavel Emelianov <xemul@openvz.org>,
Dhaval Giani <dhaval@linux.vnet.ibm.com>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>
Subject: Re: [mm] [PATCH 2/4] Memory cgroup resource counters for hierarchy
Date: Sun, 2 Nov 2008 14:56:41 +0900 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20081102145641.a15f5bb3.kamezawa.hiroyu@jp.fujitsu.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <490D3F72.9040408@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
On Sun, 02 Nov 2008 11:19:38 +0530
Balbir Singh <balbir@linux.vnet.ibm.com> wrote:
> KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki wrote:
> > On Sun, 02 Nov 2008 00:18:37 +0530
> > Balbir Singh <balbir@linux.vnet.ibm.com> wrote:
> >
> >> Add support for building hierarchies in resource counters. Cgroups allows us
> >> to build a deep hierarchy, but we currently don't link the resource counters
> >> belonging to the memory controller control groups, which are linked in
> >> cgroup hiearchy. This patch provides the infrastructure for resource counters
> >> that have the same hiearchy as their cgroup counter parts.
> >>
> >> These set of patches are based on the resource counter hiearchy patches posted
> >> by Pavel Emelianov.
> >>
> >> NOTE: Building hiearchies is expensive, deeper hierarchies imply charging
> >> the all the way up to the root. It is known that hiearchies are expensive,
> >> so the user needs to be careful and aware of the trade-offs before creating
> >> very deep ones.
> >>
> > ...isn't it better to add "root_lock" to res_counter rather than taking
> > all levels of lock one by one ?
> >
> > spin_lock(&res_counter->hierarchy_root->lock);
> > do all charge/uncharge to hierarchy
> > spin_unlock(&res_counter->hierarchy_root->lock);
> >
> > Hmm ?
> >
>
> Good thought process, but that affects and adds code complexity for the case
> when hierarchy is enabled/disabled. It is also inefficient, since all charges
> will now contend on root lock, in the current process, it is step by step, the
> contention only occurs on common parts of the hierarchy (root being the best case).
>
Above code's contention level is not different from "only root no children" case.
Just inside-lock is heavier.
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: <a href=mailto:"dont@kvack.org"> email@kvack.org </a>
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2008-11-02 5:57 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 34+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2008-11-01 18:48 [mm][PATCH 0/4] Memory cgroup hierarchy introduction Balbir Singh
2008-11-01 18:48 ` [mm] [PATCH 1/4] Memory cgroup hierarchy documentation Balbir Singh
2008-11-04 6:25 ` Paul Menage
2008-11-04 6:26 ` Paul Menage
2008-11-05 13:55 ` Balbir Singh
2008-11-01 18:48 ` [mm] [PATCH 2/4] Memory cgroup resource counters for hierarchy Balbir Singh
2008-11-02 5:42 ` KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki
2008-11-02 5:49 ` Balbir Singh
2008-11-02 5:56 ` KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki [this message]
2008-11-02 11:46 ` Balbir Singh
2008-11-01 18:48 ` [mm] [PATCH 3/4] Memory cgroup hierarchical reclaim Balbir Singh
2008-11-02 5:37 ` KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki
2008-11-02 5:44 ` Balbir Singh
2008-11-04 2:17 ` KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki
2008-11-05 13:34 ` Balbir Singh
2008-11-05 16:20 ` KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki
2008-11-06 14:00 ` Balbir Singh
2008-11-01 18:49 ` [mm] [PATCH 4/4] Memory cgroup hierarchy feature selector Balbir Singh
2008-11-02 5:38 ` KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki
2008-11-02 6:03 ` Balbir Singh
2008-11-02 6:24 ` KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki
2008-11-02 15:52 ` Balbir Singh
2008-11-04 6:37 ` Paul Menage
2008-11-06 7:00 ` Balbir Singh
2008-11-06 7:01 ` Balbir Singh
2008-11-06 6:56 ` Balbir Singh
2008-11-06 7:30 ` KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki
2008-11-04 0:15 ` [mm][PATCH 0/4] Memory cgroup hierarchy introduction KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki
2008-11-05 13:51 ` Balbir Singh
2008-11-05 16:33 ` KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki
2008-11-05 17:52 ` Balbir Singh
2008-11-06 0:22 ` KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki
2008-11-04 9:21 ` [patch 1/2] memcg: hierarchy, yet another one KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki
2008-11-04 9:25 ` KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20081102145641.a15f5bb3.kamezawa.hiroyu@jp.fujitsu.com \
--to=kamezawa.hiroyu@jp.fujitsu.com \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=balbir@linux.vnet.ibm.com \
--cc=dhaval@linux.vnet.ibm.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
--cc=lizf@cn.fujitsu.com \
--cc=menage@google.com \
--cc=nickpiggin@yahoo.com.au \
--cc=rientjes@google.com \
--cc=xemul@openvz.org \
--cc=yamamoto@valinux.co.jp \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox