From: Michal Hocko <mhocko@suse.cz>
To: Tejun Heo <tj@kernel.org>
Cc: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
Johannes Weiner <hannes@cmpxchg.org>,
KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki <kamezawa.hiroyu@jp.fujitsu.com>,
linux-mm@kvack.org, cgroups@vger.kernel.org,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Ying Han <yinghan@google.com>,
Hugh Dickins <hughd@google.com>,
Glauber Costa <glommer@parallels.com>,
Michel Lespinasse <walken@google.com>,
Greg Thelen <gthelen@google.com>,
Balbir Singh <bsingharora@gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [patch -v4 4/8] memcg: enhance memcg iterator to support predicates
Date: Wed, 5 Jun 2013 09:37:28 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20130605073728.GC15997@dhcp22.suse.cz> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20130604205426.GI14916@htj.dyndns.org>
On Tue 04-06-13 13:54:26, Tejun Heo wrote:
> Hey,
>
> On Tue, Jun 04, 2013 at 10:48:07PM +0200, Michal Hocko wrote:
> > > I really don't think memcg can afford to add more mess than there
> > > already is. Let's try to get things right with each change, please.
> >
> > Is this really about inside vs. outside skipping? I think this is a
> > general improvement to the code. I really prefer not duplicating common
> > code and skipping handling is such a code (we have a visitor which can
> > control the walk). With a side bonus that it doesn't have to pollute
> > vmscan more than necessary.
> >
> > Please be more specific about _what_ is so ugly about this interface so
> > that it matters so much.
>
> Can you please try the other approach and see how it looks?
Tejun, I do not have infinite amount of time and this is barely a
priority for the patchset. The core part is to be able to skip
nodes/subtrees which are not worth reclaiming, remember?
I have already expressed my priorities for inside skipping
decisions. You are just throwing "let's try a different way" handwavy
suggestions. I have no problem to pull the skip logic outside of
iterators if more people think that this is _really_ important. But
until then I take it as a really low priority that shouldn't delay the
patchset without a good reason.
So please try to focus on the technical parts of the patchset if you
want to help with the review. I really appreciate suggestions but please
do not get down to bike scheding.
--
Michal Hocko
SUSE Labs
--
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>
WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Michal Hocko <mhocko@suse.cz>
To: Tejun Heo <tj@kernel.org>
Cc: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
Johannes Weiner <hannes@cmpxchg.org>,
KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki <kamezawa.hiroyu@jp.fujitsu.com>,
linux-mm@kvack.org, cgroups@vger.kernel.org,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Ying Han <yinghan@google.com>,
Hugh Dickins <hughd@google.com>,
Glauber Costa <glommer@parallels.com>,
Michel Lespinasse <walken@google.com>,
Greg Thelen <gthelen@google.com>,
Balbir Singh <bsingharora@gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [patch -v4 4/8] memcg: enhance memcg iterator to support predicates
Date: Wed, 5 Jun 2013 09:37:28 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20130605073728.GC15997@dhcp22.suse.cz> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20130604205426.GI14916@htj.dyndns.org>
On Tue 04-06-13 13:54:26, Tejun Heo wrote:
> Hey,
>
> On Tue, Jun 04, 2013 at 10:48:07PM +0200, Michal Hocko wrote:
> > > I really don't think memcg can afford to add more mess than there
> > > already is. Let's try to get things right with each change, please.
> >
> > Is this really about inside vs. outside skipping? I think this is a
> > general improvement to the code. I really prefer not duplicating common
> > code and skipping handling is such a code (we have a visitor which can
> > control the walk). With a side bonus that it doesn't have to pollute
> > vmscan more than necessary.
> >
> > Please be more specific about _what_ is so ugly about this interface so
> > that it matters so much.
>
> Can you please try the other approach and see how it looks?
Tejun, I do not have infinite amount of time and this is barely a
priority for the patchset. The core part is to be able to skip
nodes/subtrees which are not worth reclaiming, remember?
I have already expressed my priorities for inside skipping
decisions. You are just throwing "let's try a different way" handwavy
suggestions. I have no problem to pull the skip logic outside of
iterators if more people think that this is _really_ important. But
until then I take it as a really low priority that shouldn't delay the
patchset without a good reason.
So please try to focus on the technical parts of the patchset if you
want to help with the review. I really appreciate suggestions but please
do not get down to bike scheding.
--
Michal Hocko
SUSE Labs
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2013-06-05 7:37 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 63+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2013-06-03 10:18 [patch v4] Soft limit rework Michal Hocko
2013-06-03 10:18 ` Michal Hocko
2013-06-03 10:18 ` [patch -v4 1/8] memcg: integrate soft reclaim tighter with zone shrinking code Michal Hocko
2013-06-03 10:18 ` Michal Hocko
2013-06-03 10:18 ` [patch -v4 2/8] memcg: Get rid of soft-limit tree infrastructure Michal Hocko
2013-06-03 10:18 ` Michal Hocko
2013-06-03 10:18 ` [patch -v4 3/8] vmscan, memcg: Do softlimit reclaim also for targeted reclaim Michal Hocko
2013-06-03 10:18 ` Michal Hocko
2013-06-03 10:18 ` Michal Hocko
2013-06-03 10:18 ` [patch -v4 4/8] memcg: enhance memcg iterator to support predicates Michal Hocko
2013-06-03 10:18 ` Michal Hocko
[not found] ` <1370254735-13012-5-git-send-email-mhocko-AlSwsSmVLrQ@public.gmane.org>
2013-06-04 1:07 ` Tejun Heo
2013-06-04 1:07 ` Tejun Heo
2013-06-04 1:07 ` Tejun Heo
2013-06-04 13:45 ` Michal Hocko
2013-06-04 13:45 ` Michal Hocko
2013-06-04 19:36 ` Tejun Heo
2013-06-04 19:36 ` Tejun Heo
[not found] ` <20130604193619.GA14916-Gd/HAXX7CRxy/B6EtB590w@public.gmane.org>
2013-06-04 20:48 ` Michal Hocko
2013-06-04 20:48 ` Michal Hocko
2013-06-04 20:48 ` Michal Hocko
2013-06-04 20:54 ` Tejun Heo
2013-06-04 20:54 ` Tejun Heo
2013-06-05 7:37 ` Michal Hocko [this message]
2013-06-05 7:37 ` Michal Hocko
2013-06-05 8:05 ` Tejun Heo
2013-06-05 8:05 ` Tejun Heo
2013-06-05 8:52 ` Michal Hocko
2013-06-05 8:52 ` Michal Hocko
2013-06-05 8:58 ` Tejun Heo
2013-06-05 8:58 ` Tejun Heo
2013-06-05 9:07 ` Michal Hocko
2013-06-05 9:07 ` Michal Hocko
2013-06-05 9:09 ` Tejun Heo
2013-06-05 9:09 ` Tejun Heo
2013-06-07 0:48 ` Tejun Heo
2013-06-07 0:48 ` Tejun Heo
2013-06-07 8:25 ` Michal Hocko
2013-06-07 8:25 ` Michal Hocko
2013-06-10 7:48 ` Michal Hocko
2013-06-10 7:48 ` Michal Hocko
2013-06-03 10:18 ` [patch -v4 5/8] memcg: track children in soft limit excess to improve soft limit Michal Hocko
2013-06-03 10:18 ` Michal Hocko
2013-06-03 10:18 ` [patch -v4 6/8] memcg, vmscan: Do not attempt soft limit reclaim if it would not scan anything Michal Hocko
2013-06-03 10:18 ` Michal Hocko
2013-06-03 10:18 ` [patch -v4 7/8] memcg: Track all children over limit in the root Michal Hocko
2013-06-03 10:18 ` Michal Hocko
2013-06-03 10:18 ` [patch -v4 8/8] memcg, vmscan: do not fall into reclaim-all pass too quickly Michal Hocko
2013-06-03 10:18 ` Michal Hocko
[not found] ` <1370254735-13012-1-git-send-email-mhocko-AlSwsSmVLrQ@public.gmane.org>
2013-06-04 16:27 ` [patch v4] Soft limit rework Balbir Singh
2013-06-04 16:27 ` Balbir Singh
2013-06-04 16:27 ` Balbir Singh
2013-06-04 16:38 ` Michal Hocko
2013-06-04 16:38 ` Michal Hocko
2013-06-04 17:57 ` Balbir Singh
2013-06-04 17:57 ` Balbir Singh
2013-06-04 18:08 ` Michal Hocko
2013-06-04 18:08 ` Michal Hocko
2013-06-11 15:43 ` Michal Hocko
2013-06-11 15:43 ` Michal Hocko
2013-06-11 15:43 ` Michal Hocko
2013-06-17 14:01 ` Michal Hocko
2013-06-17 14:01 ` Michal Hocko
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=20130605073728.GC15997@dhcp22.suse.cz \
--to=mhocko@suse.cz \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=bsingharora@gmail.com \
--cc=cgroups@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=glommer@parallels.com \
--cc=gthelen@google.com \
--cc=hannes@cmpxchg.org \
--cc=hughd@google.com \
--cc=kamezawa.hiroyu@jp.fujitsu.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
--cc=tj@kernel.org \
--cc=walken@google.com \
--cc=yinghan@google.com \
/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 an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.