From: "KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki" <kamezawa.hiroyu@jp.fujitsu.com>
To: balbir@linux.vnet.ibm.com
Cc: KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki <kamezawa.hiroyu@jp.fujitsu.com>,
linux-mm@kvack.org, YAMAMOTO Takashi <yamamoto@valinux.co.jp>,
lizf@cn.fujitsu.com,
KOSAKI Motohiro <kosaki.motohiro@jp.fujitsu.com>,
Rik van Riel <riel@redhat.com>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 4/4] Memory controller soft limit reclaim on contention (v6)
Date: Mon, 16 Mar 2009 20:58:30 +0900 (JST) [thread overview]
Message-ID: <969730ee419be9fbe4aca3ec3249650e.squirrel@webmail-b.css.fujitsu.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20090316113853.GA16897@balbir.in.ibm.com>
Balbir Singh wrote:
> * KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki <kamezawa.hiroyu@jp.fujitsu.com> [2009-03-16
> 20:10:41]:
>> >> At least, this check will be necessary in v7, I think.
>> >> shrink_slab() should be called.
>> >
>> > Why do you think so? So here is the design
>> >
>> > 1. If a cgroup was using over its soft limit, we believe that this
>> > cgroup created overall memory contention and caused the page
>> > reclaimer to get activated.
>> This assumption is wrong, see below.
>>
>> > If we can solve the situation by
>> > reclaiming from this cgroup, why do we need to invoke shrink_slab?
>> >
>> No,
>> IIUC, in big server, inode, dentry cache etc....can occupy Gigabytes
>> of memory even if 99% of them are not used.
>>
>> By shrink_slab(), we can reclaim unused but cached slabs and make
>> the kernel more healthy.
>>
>
> But that is not the job of the soft limit reclaimer.. Yes if no groups
> are over their soft limit, the regular action will take place.
>
Oh, yes, it's not job of memcg but it's job of memory management.
>>
>> > If the concern is that we are not following the traditional reclaim,
>> > soft limit reclaim can be followed by unconditional reclaim, but I
>> > believe this is not necessary. Remember, we wake up kswapd that will
>> > call shrink_slab if needed.
>> kswapd doesn't call shrink_slab() when zone->free is enough.
>> (when direct recail did good jobs.)
>>
>
> If zone->free is high why do we need shrink_slab()? The other way
> of asking it is, why does the soft limit reclaimer need to call
> shrink_slab(), when its job is to reclaim memory from cgroups above
> their soft limits.
>
Why do you consider that softlimit is called more than necessary
if shrink_slab() is never called ?
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:[~2009-03-16 11:58 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 29+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2009-03-14 17:30 [PATCH 0/4] Memory controller soft limit patches (v6) Balbir Singh
2009-03-14 17:30 ` [PATCH 1/4] Memory controller soft limit documentation (v6) Balbir Singh
2009-03-14 17:30 ` [PATCH 2/4] Memory controller soft limit interface (v6) Balbir Singh
2009-03-14 17:31 ` [PATCH 3/4] Memory controller soft limit organize cgroups (v6) Balbir Singh
2009-03-16 0:21 ` KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki
2009-03-16 8:47 ` Balbir Singh
2009-03-16 8:57 ` KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki
2009-03-14 17:31 ` [PATCH 4/4] Memory controller soft limit reclaim on contention (v6) Balbir Singh
2009-03-16 0:52 ` KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki
2009-03-16 8:35 ` Balbir Singh
2009-03-16 8:49 ` KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki
2009-03-16 9:03 ` KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki
2009-03-16 9:10 ` Balbir Singh
2009-03-16 11:10 ` KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki
2009-03-16 11:38 ` Balbir Singh
2009-03-16 11:58 ` KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki [this message]
2009-03-16 12:19 ` Balbir Singh
2009-03-17 3:47 ` KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki
2009-03-17 4:40 ` Balbir Singh
2009-03-17 4:47 ` KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki
2009-03-17 4:58 ` Balbir Singh
2009-03-17 5:17 ` KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki
2009-03-17 5:55 ` Balbir Singh
2009-03-17 6:00 ` KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki
2009-03-17 6:22 ` Balbir Singh
2009-03-17 6:30 ` KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki
2009-03-17 6:59 ` Balbir Singh
2009-03-18 0:07 ` KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki
2009-03-18 4:14 ` 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=969730ee419be9fbe4aca3ec3249650e.squirrel@webmail-b.css.fujitsu.com \
--to=kamezawa.hiroyu@jp.fujitsu.com \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=balbir@linux.vnet.ibm.com \
--cc=kosaki.motohiro@jp.fujitsu.com \
--cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
--cc=lizf@cn.fujitsu.com \
--cc=riel@redhat.com \
--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