From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from psmtp.com (na3sys010amx188.postini.com [74.125.245.188]) by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 89BF66B00F7 for ; Tue, 21 Feb 2012 18:40:47 -0500 (EST) Received: by qauh8 with SMTP id h8so8783787qau.14 for ; Tue, 21 Feb 2012 15:40:46 -0800 (PST) MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <1329824079-14449-5-git-send-email-glommer@parallels.com> References: <1329824079-14449-1-git-send-email-glommer@parallels.com> <1329824079-14449-5-git-send-email-glommer@parallels.com> Date: Tue, 21 Feb 2012 15:40:46 -0800 Message-ID: Subject: Re: [PATCH 4/7] chained slab caches: move pages to a different cache when a cache is destroyed. From: Suleiman Souhlal Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Sender: owner-linux-mm@kvack.org List-ID: To: Glauber Costa Cc: cgroups@vger.kernel.org, devel@openvz.org, linux-mm@kvack.org, "Kirill A. Shutemov" , Greg Thelen , Johannes Weiner , Michal Hocko , Hiroyouki Kamezawa , Paul Turner , Frederic Weisbecker , Pekka Enberg , Christoph Lameter On Tue, Feb 21, 2012 at 3:34 AM, Glauber Costa wrote: > In the context of tracking kernel memory objects to a cgroup, the > following problem appears: we may need to destroy a cgroup, but > this does not guarantee that all objects inside the cache are dead. > This can't be guaranteed even if we shrink the cache beforehand. > > The simple option is to simply leave the cache around. However, > intensive workloads may have generated a lot of objects and thus > the dead cache will live in memory for a long while. Why is this a problem? Leaving the cache around while there are still active objects in it would certainly be a lot simpler to understand and implement. -- Suleiman -- 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/ . Fight unfair telecom internet charges in Canada: sign http://stopthemeter.ca/ Don't email: email@kvack.org