From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from mt1.gw.fujitsu.co.jp ([10.0.50.74]) by fgwmail5.fujitsu.co.jp (Fujitsu Gateway) with ESMTP id mA6ClQEX020717 for (envelope-from kamezawa.hiroyu@jp.fujitsu.com); Thu, 6 Nov 2008 21:47:26 +0900 Received: from smail (m4 [127.0.0.1]) by outgoing.m4.gw.fujitsu.co.jp (Postfix) with ESMTP id 44E1445DD87 for ; Thu, 6 Nov 2008 21:47:26 +0900 (JST) Received: from s8.gw.fujitsu.co.jp (s8.gw.fujitsu.co.jp [10.0.50.98]) by m4.gw.fujitsu.co.jp (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9ECF445DD7C for ; Thu, 6 Nov 2008 21:47:25 +0900 (JST) Received: from s8.gw.fujitsu.co.jp (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by s8.gw.fujitsu.co.jp (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7F6CB1DB803A for ; Thu, 6 Nov 2008 21:47:25 +0900 (JST) Received: from ml13.s.css.fujitsu.com (ml13.s.css.fujitsu.com [10.249.87.103]) by s8.gw.fujitsu.co.jp (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2F69E1DB8038 for ; Thu, 6 Nov 2008 21:47:25 +0900 (JST) Message-ID: <30704.10.75.179.61.1225975644.squirrel@webmail-b.css.fujitsu.com> In-Reply-To: References: <20081105171637.1b393333.kamezawa.hiroyu@jp.fujitsu.com><49129493.9070103@linux.vnet.ibm.com> <20081106194153.220157ec.kamezawa.hiroyu@jp.fujitsu.com> Date: Thu, 6 Nov 2008 21:47:24 +0900 (JST) Subject: Re: [RFC][PATCH 7/6] memcg: add atribute (for change bahavior ofrmdir) From: "KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki" MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain;charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Sender: owner-linux-mm@kvack.org Return-Path: To: Hugh Dickins Cc: KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki , balbir@linux.vnet.ibm.com, "linux-mm@kvack.org" , "linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" , "menage@google.com" , "nishimura@mxp.nes.nec.co.jp" List-ID: Hugh Dickins said: > On Thu, 6 Nov 2008, KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki wrote: >> On Thu, 06 Nov 2008 12:24:11 +0530 >> Balbir Singh wrote: >> > KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki wrote: >> > > >> > > 1. change force_empty to do move account rather than forget all >> > >> > I would like this to be selectable, please. We don't want to break >> behaviour and >> > not everyone would like to pay the cost of movement. >> >> How about a patch like this ? I'd like to move this as [2/7], if >> possible. >> It obviously needs painful rework. If I found it difficult, schedule >> this as [7/7]. >> >> BTW, cost of movement itself is not far from cost for force_empty. >> >> If you can't find why "forget" is bad, please consider one more day. > > My recollection from a year ago is that force_empty totally violated > the rules established elsewhere, making a nonsense of it all: once a > force_empty had been done, you couldn't really be sure of anything > (perhaps it deserved a Taint flag). > yes. that was terrible. (but necessary to do so because we accounted pages not on LRU or some other reason.) > Without studying your proposals at all, I do believe you've a good > chance of creating a sensible and consistent force_empty by moving > account, and abandoning the old "forget all" approach completely. > yes. I'm very encouraged. thanks! After patch [1/6] -> move all at force empty After this -> move all or free (not forget) all. -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