From: KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki <kamezawa.hiroyu@jp.fujitsu.com>
To: balbir@linux.vnet.ibm.com
Cc: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
Sudhir Kumar <skumar@linux.vnet.ibm.com>,
YAMAMOTO Takashi <yamamoto@valinux.co.jp>,
Paul Menage <menage@google.com>,
lizf@cn.fujitsu.com, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
linux-mm@kvack.org, David Rientjes <rientjes@google.com>,
Pavel Emelianov <xemul@openvz.org>
Subject: Re: [RFC][PATCH 3/4] Memory controller soft limit organize cgroups
Date: Thu, 8 Jan 2009 13:57:28 +0900 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20090108135728.cdb20fe2.kamezawa.hiroyu@jp.fujitsu.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20090108044108.GG7294@balbir.in.ibm.com>
On Thu, 8 Jan 2009 10:11:08 +0530
Balbir Singh <balbir@linux.vnet.ibm.com> wrote:
> * KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki <kamezawa.hiroyu@jp.fujitsu.com> [2009-01-08 13:28:55]:
>
> > On Thu, 8 Jan 2009 09:55:58 +0530
> > Balbir Singh <balbir@linux.vnet.ibm.com> wrote:
> >
> > > * KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki <kamezawa.hiroyu@jp.fujitsu.com> [2009-01-08 10:11:48]:
> > > > Hmm, Could you clarify following ?
> > > >
> > > > - Usage of memory at insertsion and usage of memory at reclaim is different.
> > > > So, this *sorted* order by RB-tree isn't the best order in general.
> > >
> > > True, but we frequently update the tree at an interval of HZ/4.
> > > Updating at every page fault sounded like an overkill and building the
> > > entire tree at reclaim is an overkill too.
> > >
> > "sort" is not necessary.
> > If this feature is implemented as background daemon,
> > just select the worst one at each iteration is enough.
>
> OK, definitely an alternative worth considering, but the trade-off is
> lazy building (your suggestion), which involves actively seeing the
> usage of all cgroups (and if they are large, O(c), c is number of
> cgroups can be quite a bit) versus building the tree as and when the
> fault occurs and controlled by some interval.
>
I never think there will be "thousands" of memcg. O(c) is not so bad
if it's on background.
But usual cost of adding res_counter_soft_limit_excess(&mem->res); is big...
This maintainance cost of tree is always necessary even while there are no
memory shortage.
BTW,
- mutex is bad. Can you use mutex while __GFP_WAIT is unset ?
- what happens when a big uncharge() occurs and no new charge() happens ?
please add
+ mem = mem_cgroup_get_largest_soft_limit_exceeding_node();
if ( mem is still over soft limit )
do reclaim....
at least.
-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:[~2009-01-08 4:58 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 19+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2009-01-07 18:41 [RFC][PATCH 0/4] Memory controller soft limit patches Balbir Singh
2009-01-07 18:41 ` [RFC][PATCH 1/4] Memory controller soft limit documentation Balbir Singh
2009-01-14 1:45 ` Paul Menage
2009-01-14 5:30 ` Balbir Singh
2009-01-07 18:41 ` [RFC][PATCH 2/4] Memory controller soft limit interface Balbir Singh
2009-01-07 18:41 ` [RFC][PATCH 3/4] Memory controller soft limit organize cgroups Balbir Singh
2009-01-08 1:11 ` KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki
2009-01-08 4:25 ` Balbir Singh
2009-01-08 4:28 ` KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki
2009-01-08 4:41 ` Balbir Singh
2009-01-08 4:57 ` KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki [this message]
2009-01-07 18:41 ` [RFC][PATCH 4/4] Memory controller soft limit reclaim on contention Balbir Singh
2009-01-07 18:56 ` [RFC][PATCH 0/4] Memory controller soft limit patches Dhaval Giani
2009-01-08 0:37 ` KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki
2009-01-08 3:46 ` Balbir Singh
2009-01-08 0:30 ` KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki
2009-01-08 3:59 ` Balbir Singh
2009-01-08 4:21 ` KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki
2009-01-08 4:41 ` Daisuke Nishimura
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=20090108135728.cdb20fe2.kamezawa.hiroyu@jp.fujitsu.com \
--to=kamezawa.hiroyu@jp.fujitsu.com \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=balbir@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=rientjes@google.com \
--cc=skumar@linux.vnet.ibm.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