From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1754811AbYKDUwl (ORCPT ); Tue, 4 Nov 2008 15:52:41 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1753541AbYKDUwe (ORCPT ); Tue, 4 Nov 2008 15:52:34 -0500 Received: from casper.infradead.org ([85.118.1.10]:52997 "EHLO casper.infradead.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1753469AbYKDUwd (ORCPT ); Tue, 4 Nov 2008 15:52:33 -0500 Subject: Re: [patch 0/7] cpuset writeback throttling From: Peter Zijlstra To: Andrew Morton Cc: David Rientjes , cl@linux-foundation.org, npiggin@suse.de, menage@google.com, dfults@sgi.com, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org In-Reply-To: <20081104124753.fb1dde5a.akpm@linux-foundation.org> References: <20081104124753.fb1dde5a.akpm@linux-foundation.org> Content-Type: text/plain Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Date: Tue, 04 Nov 2008 21:53:08 +0100 Message-Id: <1225831988.7803.1939.camel@twins> Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Evolution 2.24.1 Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Tue, 2008-11-04 at 12:47 -0800, Andrew Morton wrote: > On Thu, 30 Oct 2008 12:23:10 -0700 (PDT) > David Rientjes wrote: > > > This is the revised cpuset writeback throttling patchset > > I'm all confused about why this is a cpuset thing rather than a cgroups > thing. What are the relationships here? > > I mean, writeback throttling _should_ operate upon a control group > (more specifically: a memcg), yes? I guess you're assuming a 1:1 > relationship here? I think the main reason is that we have per-node vmstats so the cpuset extention is relatively easy. Whereas we do not currently maintain vmstats on a cgroup level - although I imagine that could be remedied.