Re: [mm][PATCH 0/4] Memory cgroup hierarchy introduction

[KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki <kamezawa.hiroyu@jp.fujitsu.com>]

On Sun, 02 Nov 2008 00:18:12 +0530
Balbir Singh <balbir@linux.vnet.ibm.com> wrote:

> This patch follows several iterations of the memory controller hierarchy
> patches. The hardwall approach by Kamezawa-San[1]. Version 1 of this patchset
> at [2].
> 
> The current approach is based on [2] and has the following properties
> 
> 1. Hierarchies are very natural in a filesystem like the cgroup filesystem.
>    A multi-tree hierarchy has been supported for a long time in filesystems.
>    When the feature is turned on, we honor hierarchies such that the root
>    accounts for resource usage of all children and limits can be set at
>    any point in the hierarchy. Any memory cgroup is limited by limits
>    along the hierarchy. The total usage of all children of a node cannot
>    exceed the limit of the node.
> 2. The hierarchy feature is selectable and off by default
> 3. Hierarchies are expensive and the trade off is depth versus performance.
>    Hierarchies can also be completely turned off.
> 
> The patches are against 2.6.28-rc2-mm1 and were tested in a KVM instance
> with SMP and swap turned on.
> 

As first impression, I think hierarchical LRU management is not good...means
not fair from viewpoint of memory management.
I'd like to show some other possible implementation of
try_to_free_mem_cgroup_pages() if I can.

Anyway, I have to merge this with mem+swap controller. 

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>