From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mail203.messagelabs.com (mail203.messagelabs.com [216.82.254.243]) by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix) with SMTP id D8BDE6B0047 for ; Fri, 13 Mar 2009 04:37:26 -0400 (EDT) Received: from m1.gw.fujitsu.co.jp ([10.0.50.71]) by fgwmail6.fujitsu.co.jp (Fujitsu Gateway) with ESMTP id n2D8bOgd010275 for (envelope-from kamezawa.hiroyu@jp.fujitsu.com); Fri, 13 Mar 2009 17:37:24 +0900 Received: from smail (m1 [127.0.0.1]) by outgoing.m1.gw.fujitsu.co.jp (Postfix) with ESMTP id 22D7845DD76 for ; Fri, 13 Mar 2009 17:37:24 +0900 (JST) Received: from s1.gw.fujitsu.co.jp (s1.gw.fujitsu.co.jp [10.0.50.91]) by m1.gw.fujitsu.co.jp (Postfix) with ESMTP id EE45345DD74 for ; Fri, 13 Mar 2009 17:37:23 +0900 (JST) Received: from s1.gw.fujitsu.co.jp (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by s1.gw.fujitsu.co.jp (Postfix) with ESMTP id C470B1DB8015 for ; Fri, 13 Mar 2009 17:37:23 +0900 (JST) Received: from ml13.s.css.fujitsu.com (ml13.s.css.fujitsu.com [10.249.87.103]) by s1.gw.fujitsu.co.jp (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2ED291DB801A for ; Fri, 13 Mar 2009 17:37:20 +0900 (JST) Message-ID: In-Reply-To: <20090313072649.GM16897@balbir.in.ibm.com> References: <20090313145032.AF4D.A69D9226@jp.fujitsu.com> <20090313070340.GI16897@balbir.in.ibm.com> <20090313160632.683D.A69D9226@jp.fujitsu.com> <20090313072649.GM16897@balbir.in.ibm.com> Date: Fri, 13 Mar 2009 17:37:19 +0900 (JST) Subject: Re: [PATCH 4/4] Memory controller soft limit reclaim on contention (v5) From: "KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki" MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain;charset=iso-2022-jp Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Sender: owner-linux-mm@kvack.org To: balbir@linux.vnet.ibm.com Cc: KOSAKI Motohiro , linux-mm@kvack.org, YAMAMOTO Takashi , lizf@cn.fujitsu.com, Rik van Riel , Andrew Morton , KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki List-ID: Balbir Singh wrote: > * KOSAKI Motohiro [2009-03-13 16:17:25]: > 1. Kame's scan logic, selects shrink_zone for the mem cgroup, but the > pages scanned and reclaimed from depend on priority and watermarks > of the zone and *not* at all on the soft limit parameters. What means "not at all" ? My test result was illusion ? My routine reclaims memory from memcg which over soft limit.... What modification is necessary ? (Anyway, I'll remove priority and introduce something more intellegent here.) > 2. Because soft limit reclaim fails to reclaim anythoing (due to 1), > shrink_zone which is called, does reclaiming indepedent of any > knowledge of soft limits, which does not work as expected. > I agree that we need some hook to loop in of shrink_zone to taking care of softlimit. Thanks, -Kame > > -- > 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: email@kvack.org > -- 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