From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mail172.messagelabs.com (mail172.messagelabs.com [216.82.254.3]) by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 642386B00A2 for ; Mon, 19 Jan 2009 02:16:16 -0500 (EST) Received: from m1.gw.fujitsu.co.jp ([10.0.50.71]) by fgwmail5.fujitsu.co.jp (Fujitsu Gateway) with ESMTP id n0J7GEwc011722 for (envelope-from kamezawa.hiroyu@jp.fujitsu.com); Mon, 19 Jan 2009 16:16:14 +0900 Received: from smail (m1 [127.0.0.1]) by outgoing.m1.gw.fujitsu.co.jp (Postfix) with ESMTP id E474D45DD72 for ; Mon, 19 Jan 2009 16:16:13 +0900 (JST) Received: from s1.gw.fujitsu.co.jp (s1.gw.fujitsu.co.jp [10.0.50.91]) by m1.gw.fujitsu.co.jp (Postfix) with ESMTP id C465145DD6F for ; Mon, 19 Jan 2009 16:16:13 +0900 (JST) Received: from s1.gw.fujitsu.co.jp (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by s1.gw.fujitsu.co.jp (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9D3BA1DB8042 for ; Mon, 19 Jan 2009 16:16:13 +0900 (JST) Received: from m107.s.css.fujitsu.com (m107.s.css.fujitsu.com [10.249.87.107]) by s1.gw.fujitsu.co.jp (Postfix) with ESMTP id 56CB71DB8040 for ; Mon, 19 Jan 2009 16:16:13 +0900 (JST) Date: Mon, 19 Jan 2009 16:15:08 +0900 From: KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki Subject: Re: [PATCH] memcg: update document to mention swapoff should be test. Message-Id: <20090119161508.f8b9d342.kamezawa.hiroyu@jp.fujitsu.com> In-Reply-To: <20090119071220.GE6039@balbir.in.ibm.com> References: <20090119155748.acc60988.kamezawa.hiroyu@jp.fujitsu.com> <20090119071220.GE6039@balbir.in.ibm.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-linux-mm@kvack.org To: balbir@linux.vnet.ibm.com Cc: "linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" , "nishimura@mxp.nes.nec.co.jp" , "lizf@cn.fujitsu.com" , "linux-mm@kvack.org" , "akpm@linux-foundation.org" List-ID: On Mon, 19 Jan 2009 12:42:20 +0530 Balbir Singh wrote: > * KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki [2009-01-19 15:57:48]: > > > From: KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki > > > > Considering recently found problem: > > memcg-fix-refcnt-handling-at-swapoff.patch > > > > It's better to mention about swapoff behavior in memcg_test document. > > > > Signed-off-by: KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki > > --- > > Documentation/cgroups/memcg_test.txt | 24 ++++++++++++++++++++++-- > > 1 file changed, 22 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-) > > > > Index: mmotm-2.6.29-Jan16/Documentation/cgroups/memcg_test.txt > > =================================================================== > > --- mmotm-2.6.29-Jan16.orig/Documentation/cgroups/memcg_test.txt > > +++ mmotm-2.6.29-Jan16/Documentation/cgroups/memcg_test.txt > > @@ -1,6 +1,6 @@ > > Memory Resource Controller(Memcg) Implementation Memo. > > -Last Updated: 2008/12/15 > > -Base Kernel Version: based on 2.6.28-rc8-mm. > > +Last Updated: 2009/1/19 > > +Base Kernel Version: based on 2.6.29-rc2. > > > > Because VM is getting complex (one of reasons is memcg...), memcg's behavior > > is complex. This is a document for memcg's internal behavior. > > @@ -340,3 +340,23 @@ Under below explanation, we assume CONFI > > # mount -t cgroup none /cgroup -t cpuset,memory,cpu,devices > > > > and do task move, mkdir, rmdir etc...under this. > > + > > + 9.7 swapoff. > > + Besides management of swap is one of complicated parts of memcg, > > + call path of swap-in at swapoff is not same as usual swap-in path.. > > + It's worth to be tested explicitly. > > + > > + For example, test like following is good. > > + (Shell-A) > > + # mount -t cgroup none /cgroup -t memory > > + # mkdir /cgroup/test > > + # echo 40M > /cgroup/test/memory.limit_in_bytes > > + # echo 0 > /cgroup/test/tasks > > 0? shouldn't this be pid? Potentially echo $$ > 0 is handled as $$ in cgroup/tasks file. -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