From: Michal Hocko <mhocko@suse.cz>
To: Tejun Heo <tj@kernel.org>
Cc: Johannes Weiner <hannes@cmpxchg.org>,
Greg Thelen <gthelen@google.com>, Hugh Dickins <hughd@google.com>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki <kamezawa.hiroyu@jp.fujitsu.com>,
KOSAKI Motohiro <kosaki.motohiro@jp.fujitsu.com>,
Michel Lespinasse <walken@google.com>,
Roman Gushchin <klamm@yandex-team.ru>,
LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
linux-mm@kvack.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/2] memcg: Allow hard guarantee mode for low limit reclaim
Date: Wed, 11 Jun 2014 16:11:17 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20140611141117.GF4520@dhcp22.suse.cz> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20140611123109.GA17777@htj.dyndns.org>
On Wed 11-06-14 08:31:09, Tejun Heo wrote:
> Hello, Michal.
>
> On Wed, Jun 11, 2014 at 09:57:29AM +0200, Michal Hocko wrote:
> > Is this the kind of symmetry Tejun is asking for and that would make
> > change is Nack position? I am still not sure it satisfies his soft
>
> Yes, pretty much. What primarily bothered me was the soft/hard
> guarantees being chosen by a toggle switch while the soft/hard limits
> can be configured separately and combined.
The last consensus at LSF was that there would be a knob which will
distinguish hard/best effort behavior. The weaker semantic has strong
usecases IMHO so I wanted to start with it and add a knob for the hard
guarantee later when explicitly asked for.
Going with min, low, high and hard makes more sense to me of course.
> > guarantee objections from other email.
>
> I was wondering about the usefulness of "low" itself in isolation and
I think it has more usecases than "min" from simply practical POV. OOM
means a potential service down time and that is a no go. Optimistic
isolation on the other hand adds an advantages of the isolation most of
the time while not getting completely flat on an exception (be it
misconfiguration or a corner case like mentioned during the discussion).
That doesn't mean "min" is not useful. It definitely is, the category
of usecases will be more specific though.
> I still think it'd be less useful than "high", but as there seem to be
> use cases which can be served with that and especially as a part of a
> consistent control scheme, I have no objection.
>
> "low" definitely requires a notification mechanism tho.
Would vmpressure notification be sufficient? That one is in place for
any memcg which is reclaimed.
Or are you thinking about something more like oom_control?
--
Michal Hocko
SUSE Labs
--
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:[~2014-06-11 14:11 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 99+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2014-04-28 12:26 [PATCH v2 0/4] memcg: Low-limit reclaim Michal Hocko
2014-04-28 12:26 ` [PATCH 1/4] memcg, mm: introduce lowlimit reclaim Michal Hocko
2014-04-30 22:55 ` Johannes Weiner
2014-05-02 9:36 ` Michal Hocko
2014-05-02 12:07 ` Michal Hocko
2014-05-02 13:01 ` Johannes Weiner
2014-05-02 14:15 ` Michal Hocko
2014-05-02 15:04 ` Johannes Weiner
2014-05-02 15:11 ` Michal Hocko
2014-05-02 15:34 ` Johannes Weiner
2014-05-02 15:48 ` Michal Hocko
2014-05-06 19:58 ` Michal Hocko
2014-05-02 15:58 ` Johannes Weiner
2014-05-02 16:49 ` Michal Hocko
2014-05-02 22:00 ` Johannes Weiner
2014-05-05 14:21 ` Michal Hocko
2014-05-19 16:18 ` Michal Hocko
2014-06-11 15:15 ` Johannes Weiner
2014-06-11 16:08 ` Michal Hocko
2014-05-06 13:29 ` Johannes Weiner
2014-05-06 14:32 ` Michal Hocko
2014-05-06 15:21 ` Johannes Weiner
2014-05-06 16:12 ` Michal Hocko
2014-05-06 16:51 ` Johannes Weiner
2014-05-06 18:30 ` Michal Hocko
2014-05-06 19:55 ` Johannes Weiner
2014-04-28 12:26 ` [PATCH 2/4] memcg: Allow setting low_limit Michal Hocko
2014-04-28 12:26 ` [PATCH 3/4] memcg, doc: clarify global vs. limit reclaims Michal Hocko
2014-04-30 23:03 ` Johannes Weiner
2014-05-02 9:43 ` Michal Hocko
2014-05-06 19:56 ` Michal Hocko
2014-04-28 12:26 ` [PATCH 4/4] memcg: Document memory.low_limit_in_bytes Michal Hocko
2014-04-30 22:57 ` Johannes Weiner
2014-05-02 9:46 ` Michal Hocko
2014-04-28 15:46 ` [PATCH v2 0/4] memcg: Low-limit reclaim Roman Gushchin
2014-04-29 7:42 ` Greg Thelen
2014-04-29 10:50 ` Roman Gushchin
2014-04-29 12:54 ` Michal Hocko
2014-04-30 21:52 ` Andrew Morton
2014-04-30 22:49 ` Johannes Weiner
2014-05-02 12:03 ` Michal Hocko
2014-04-30 21:59 ` Andrew Morton
2014-05-02 11:22 ` Michal Hocko
2014-05-28 12:10 ` Michal Hocko
2014-05-28 13:49 ` Johannes Weiner
2014-05-28 14:21 ` Michal Hocko
2014-05-28 15:28 ` Johannes Weiner
2014-05-28 15:54 ` Michal Hocko
2014-05-28 16:33 ` Johannes Weiner
2014-06-03 11:07 ` Michal Hocko
2014-06-03 14:22 ` Johannes Weiner
2014-06-04 14:46 ` Michal Hocko
2014-06-04 15:44 ` Johannes Weiner
2014-06-04 19:18 ` Hugh Dickins
2014-06-04 21:45 ` Johannes Weiner
2014-06-05 14:51 ` Michal Hocko
2014-06-05 16:10 ` Johannes Weiner
2014-06-05 16:43 ` Michal Hocko
2014-06-05 18:23 ` Johannes Weiner
2014-06-06 14:44 ` Michal Hocko
2014-06-06 14:46 ` [PATCH 1/2] mm, memcg: allow OOM if no memcg is eligible during direct reclaim Michal Hocko
2014-06-06 14:46 ` [PATCH 2/2] memcg: Allow hard guarantee mode for low limit reclaim Michal Hocko
2014-06-06 15:29 ` Tejun Heo
2014-06-06 15:34 ` Tejun Heo
2014-06-09 8:30 ` Michal Hocko
2014-06-09 13:54 ` Tejun Heo
2014-06-09 22:52 ` Greg Thelen
2014-06-10 16:57 ` Johannes Weiner
2014-06-10 22:16 ` Greg Thelen
2014-06-11 7:57 ` Michal Hocko
2014-06-11 8:00 ` [PATCH 1/2] mm, memcg: allow OOM if no memcg is eligible during direct reclaim Michal Hocko
2014-06-11 8:00 ` [PATCH 2/2] memcg: Allow guarantee reclaim Michal Hocko
2014-06-11 15:36 ` Johannes Weiner
2014-06-12 13:22 ` Michal Hocko
2014-06-12 13:56 ` Johannes Weiner
2014-06-12 14:22 ` Michal Hocko
2014-06-12 16:17 ` Tejun Heo
2014-06-16 12:59 ` Michal Hocko
2014-06-16 13:57 ` Tejun Heo
2014-06-16 14:04 ` Michal Hocko
2014-06-16 14:12 ` Tejun Heo
2014-06-16 14:29 ` Michal Hocko
2014-06-16 14:40 ` Tejun Heo
2014-06-12 16:51 ` Johannes Weiner
2014-06-16 13:22 ` Michal Hocko
2014-06-11 15:20 ` [PATCH 1/2] mm, memcg: allow OOM if no memcg is eligible during direct reclaim Johannes Weiner
2014-06-11 16:14 ` Michal Hocko
2014-06-11 12:31 ` [PATCH 2/2] memcg: Allow hard guarantee mode for low limit reclaim Tejun Heo
2014-06-11 14:11 ` Michal Hocko [this message]
2014-06-11 15:34 ` Tejun Heo
2014-06-05 19:36 ` [PATCH v2 0/4] memcg: Low-limit reclaim Tejun Heo
2014-06-05 14:32 ` Michal Hocko
2014-06-05 15:43 ` Johannes Weiner
2014-06-05 16:09 ` Michal Hocko
2014-06-05 16:46 ` Johannes Weiner
2014-05-28 16:17 ` Greg Thelen
2014-06-03 11:09 ` Michal Hocko
2014-06-03 14:01 ` Greg Thelen
2014-06-03 14:44 ` Michal Hocko
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=20140611141117.GF4520@dhcp22.suse.cz \
--to=mhocko@suse.cz \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=gthelen@google.com \
--cc=hannes@cmpxchg.org \
--cc=hughd@google.com \
--cc=kamezawa.hiroyu@jp.fujitsu.com \
--cc=klamm@yandex-team.ru \
--cc=kosaki.motohiro@jp.fujitsu.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
--cc=tj@kernel.org \
--cc=walken@google.com \
/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