From: KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki <kamezawa.hiroyu@jp.fujitsu.com>
To: Balbir Singh <balbir@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
Cc: linux-mm@kvack.org, Sudhir Kumar <skumar@linux.vnet.ibm.com>,
YAMAMOTO Takashi <yamamoto@valinux.co.jp>,
Bharata B Rao <bharata@in.ibm.com>,
Paul Menage <menage@google.com>,
lizf@cn.fujitsu.com, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
KOSAKI Motohiro <kosaki.motohiro@jp.fujitsu.com>,
David Rientjes <rientjes@google.com>,
Pavel Emelianov <xemul@openvz.org>,
Dhaval Giani <dhaval@linux.vnet.ibm.com>,
Rik van Riel <riel@redhat.com>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>
Subject: Re: [RFC][PATCH 0/4] Memory controller soft limit patches (v2)
Date: Tue, 17 Feb 2009 09:05:23 +0900 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20090217090523.975bbec2.kamezawa.hiroyu@jp.fujitsu.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20090216110844.29795.17804.sendpatchset@localhost.localdomain>
On Mon, 16 Feb 2009 16:38:44 +0530
Balbir Singh <balbir@linux.vnet.ibm.com> wrote:
>
> From: Balbir Singh <balbir@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
>
> Changelog v2...v1
> 1. Soft limits now support hierarchies
> 2. Use spinlocks instead of mutexes for synchronization of the RB tree
>
> Here is v2 of the new soft limit implementation. Soft limits is a new feature
> for the memory resource controller, something similar has existed in the
> group scheduler in the form of shares. The CPU controllers interpretation
> of shares is very different though. We'll compare shares and soft limits
> below.
>
> Soft limits are the most useful feature to have for environments where
> the administrator wants to overcommit the system, such that only on memory
> contention do the limits become active. The current soft limits implementation
> provides a soft_limit_in_bytes interface for the memory controller and not
> for memory+swap controller. The implementation maintains an RB-Tree of groups
> that exceed their soft limit and starts reclaiming from the group that
> exceeds this limit by the maximum amount.
>
> This is an RFC implementation and is not meant for inclusion
>
some thoughts after reading patch.
1. As I pointed out, cpuset/mempolicy case is not handled yet.
2. I don't like to change usual direct-memory-reclaim path. It will be obstacles
for VM-maintaners to improve memory reclaim. memcg's LRU is designed for
shrinking memory usage and not for avoiding memory shortage. IOW, it's slow routine
for reclaiming memory for memory shortage.
3. After this patch, res_counter is no longer for general purpose res_counter...
It seems to have too many unnecessary accessories for general purpose.
4. please use css_tryget() rather than mem_cgroup_get().
5. please remove mem_cgroup from tree at force_empty or rmdir.
Just making memcg->on_tree=false is enough ? I'm in doubt.
6. What happens when the-largest-soft-limit-memcg has tons on Anon on swapless
system and memory reclaim cannot make enough progress ?
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:[~2009-02-17 0:06 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 19+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2009-02-16 11:08 Balbir Singh
2009-02-16 11:08 ` [RFC][PATCH 1/4] Memory controller soft limit documentation (v2) Balbir Singh
2009-02-16 11:08 ` [RFC][PATCH 2/4] Memory controller soft limit interface (v2) Balbir Singh
2009-02-16 11:09 ` [RFC][PATCH 3/4] Memory controller soft limit organize cgroups (v2) Balbir Singh
2009-02-17 1:00 ` KOSAKI Motohiro
2009-02-17 3:24 ` Balbir Singh
2009-02-16 11:09 ` [RFC][PATCH 4/4] Memory controller soft limit reclaim on contention (v2) Balbir Singh
2009-02-17 1:20 ` KOSAKI Motohiro
2009-02-17 3:12 ` Balbir Singh
2009-02-17 0:05 ` KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki [this message]
2009-02-17 3:05 ` [RFC][PATCH 0/4] Memory controller soft limit patches (v2) Balbir Singh
2009-02-17 4:03 ` KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki
2009-02-17 4:20 ` KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki
2009-02-17 4:42 ` Balbir Singh
2009-02-17 4:41 ` Balbir Singh
2009-02-17 5:10 ` KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki
2009-02-17 5:39 ` Balbir Singh
2009-02-17 6:36 ` KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki
2009-02-17 6:43 ` Balbir Singh
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=20090217090523.975bbec2.kamezawa.hiroyu@jp.fujitsu.com \
--to=kamezawa.hiroyu@jp.fujitsu.com \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=balbir@linux.vnet.ibm.com \
--cc=bharata@in.ibm.com \
--cc=dhaval@linux.vnet.ibm.com \
--cc=kosaki.motohiro@jp.fujitsu.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
--cc=lizf@cn.fujitsu.com \
--cc=menage@google.com \
--cc=riel@redhat.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