From: Balbir Singh <balbir@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
To: KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki <kamezawa.hiroyu@jp.fujitsu.com>
Cc: "linux-mm@kvack.org" <linux-mm@kvack.org>,
"linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
"nishimura@mxp.nes.nec.co.jp" <nishimura@mxp.nes.nec.co.jp>,
"kosaki.motohiro@jp.fujitsu.com" <kosaki.motohiro@jp.fujitsu.com>
Subject: Re: [RFC][PATCH 0/5] memcg softlimit (Another one) v4
Date: Sun, 15 Mar 2009 00:22:46 +0530 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20090314185246.GT16897@balbir.in.ibm.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20090312095247.bf338fe8.kamezawa.hiroyu@jp.fujitsu.com>
* KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki <kamezawa.hiroyu@jp.fujitsu.com> [2009-03-12 09:52:47]:
> Hi, this is a patch for implemnt softlimit to memcg.
>
> I did some clean up and bug fixes.
>
> Anyway I have to look into details of "LRU scan algorithm" after this.
>
> How this works:
>
> (1) Set softlimit threshold to memcg.
> #echo 400M > /cgroups/my_group/memory.softlimit_in_bytes.
>
> (2) Define priority as victim.
> #echo 3 > /cgroups/my_group/memory.softlimit_priority.
> 0 is the lowest, 8 is the highest.
> If "8", softlimit feature ignore this group.
> default value is "8".
>
> (3) Add some memory pressure and make kswapd() work.
> kswapd will reclaim memory from victims paying regard to priority.
>
> Simple test on my 2cpu 86-64 box with 1.6Gbytes of memory (...vmware)
>
> While a process malloc 800MB of memory and touch it and sleep in a group,
> run kernel make -j 16 under a victim cgroup with softlimit=300M, priority=3.
>
> Without softlimit => 400MB of malloc'ed memory are swapped out.
> With softlimit => 80MB of malloc'ed memory are swapped out.
>
> I think 80MB of swap is from direct memory reclaim path. And this
> seems not to be terrible result.
>
> I'll do more test on other hosts. Any comments are welcome.
Hi, Kamezawa-San,
I tried some simple tests with this patch and the results are not
anywhere close to expected.
1. My setup is 4GB RAM with 4 CPUs and I boot with numa=fake=4
2. I setup my cgroups as follows
a. created /a and /b and set memory.use_hierarchy=1
b. created /a/x and /b/x, set their memory.softlimit_priority=1
c. set softlimit_in_bytes for a/x to 1G and b/x to 2G
d. I assigned tasks to a/x and b/x
I expected the tasks in a/x and b/x to get memory distributed in the
ratio to 1:2. Here is what I found
1. The task in a/x got more memory than the task in b/x even though
I started the task in b/x first
2. Even changing softlimit_priority (increased for b) did not help much
--
Balbir
--
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:[~2009-03-14 18:53 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 34+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2009-03-12 0:52 KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki
2009-03-12 0:55 ` [BUGFIX][PATCH 1/5] memcg use correct scan number at reclaim KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki
2009-03-12 3:49 ` Balbir Singh
2009-03-12 3:51 ` KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki
2009-03-12 4:00 ` Balbir Singh
2009-03-12 4:05 ` KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki
2009-03-12 4:14 ` Balbir Singh
2009-03-12 4:17 ` KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki
2009-03-12 7:45 ` KOSAKI Motohiro
2009-03-12 9:45 ` Balbir Singh
2009-03-12 11:23 ` KOSAKI Motohiro
2009-03-12 0:56 ` [RFC][PATCH 2/5] add softlimit to res_counter KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki
2009-03-12 3:54 ` Balbir Singh
2009-03-12 3:58 ` KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki
2009-03-12 4:10 ` Balbir Singh
2009-03-12 4:14 ` KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki
2009-03-12 0:57 ` [RFC][PATCH 3/5] memcg per zone softlimit scheduler core KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki
2009-03-12 0:58 ` [RFC][PATCH 4/5] memcg softlimit_priority KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki
2009-03-12 1:00 ` [RFC][PATCH 5/5] memcg softlimit hooks to kswapd KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki
2009-03-12 3:58 ` Balbir Singh
2009-03-12 4:02 ` KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki
2009-03-12 4:59 ` KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki
2009-03-12 1:01 ` [RFC][PATCH 6/5] softlimit document KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki
2009-03-12 1:54 ` Li Zefan
2009-03-12 2:01 ` KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki
2009-03-12 3:46 ` [RFC][PATCH 0/5] memcg softlimit (Another one) v4 Balbir Singh
2009-03-12 4:39 ` KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki
2009-03-12 5:04 ` Balbir Singh
2009-03-12 5:32 ` KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki
2009-03-12 8:26 ` Balbir Singh
2009-03-12 8:45 ` KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki
2009-03-12 9:53 ` Balbir Singh
2009-03-14 18:52 ` Balbir Singh [this message]
2009-03-16 0:10 ` 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=20090314185246.GT16897@balbir.in.ibm.com \
--to=balbir@linux.vnet.ibm.com \
--cc=kamezawa.hiroyu@jp.fujitsu.com \
--cc=kosaki.motohiro@jp.fujitsu.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
--cc=nishimura@mxp.nes.nec.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