From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Johannes Weiner Subject: Re: [PATCH 5/8] mm: memcontrol: account socket memory on unified hierarchy Date: Thu, 5 Nov 2015 17:52:00 -0500 Message-ID: <20151105225200.GA5432@cmpxchg.org> References: <20151027122647.GG9891@dhcp22.suse.cz> <20151027154138.GA4665@cmpxchg.org> <20151027161554.GJ9891@dhcp22.suse.cz> <20151027164227.GB7749@cmpxchg.org> <20151029152546.GG23598@dhcp22.suse.cz> <20151029161009.GA9160@cmpxchg.org> <20151104104239.GG29607@dhcp22.suse.cz> <20151104195037.GA6872@cmpxchg.org> <20151105144002.GB15111@dhcp22.suse.cz> <20151105205522.GA1067@cmpxchg.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Return-path: Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20151105205522.GA1067-druUgvl0LCNAfugRpC6u6w@public.gmane.org> Sender: cgroups-owner-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org List-ID: Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit To: Michal Hocko Cc: David Miller , akpm-de/tnXTf+JLsfHDXvbKv3WD2FQJk+8+b@public.gmane.org, vdavydov-5HdwGun5lf+gSpxsJD1C4w@public.gmane.org, tj-DgEjT+Ai2ygdnm+yROfE0A@public.gmane.org, netdev-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org, linux-mm-Bw31MaZKKs3YtjvyW6yDsg@public.gmane.org, cgroups-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org, linux-kernel-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org On Thu, Nov 05, 2015 at 03:55:22PM -0500, Johannes Weiner wrote: > On Thu, Nov 05, 2015 at 03:40:02PM +0100, Michal Hocko wrote: > > This would be true if they moved on to the new cgroup API intentionally. > > The reality is more complicated though. AFAIK sysmted is waiting for > > cgroup2 already and privileged services enable all available resource > > controllers by default as I've learned just recently. > > Have you filed a report with them? I don't think they should turn them > on unless users explicitely configure resource control for the unit. Okay, verified with systemd people that they're not planning on enabling resource control per default. Inflammatory half-truths, man. This is not constructive. From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mail-wm0-f52.google.com (mail-wm0-f52.google.com [74.125.82.52]) by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0E13782F64 for ; Thu, 5 Nov 2015 17:52:11 -0500 (EST) Received: by wmww144 with SMTP id w144so18213309wmw.1 for ; Thu, 05 Nov 2015 14:52:10 -0800 (PST) Received: from gum.cmpxchg.org (gum.cmpxchg.org. [85.214.110.215]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPS id hi4si234548wjc.65.2015.11.05.14.52.09 for (version=TLS1_2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128/128); Thu, 05 Nov 2015 14:52:09 -0800 (PST) Date: Thu, 5 Nov 2015 17:52:00 -0500 From: Johannes Weiner Subject: Re: [PATCH 5/8] mm: memcontrol: account socket memory on unified hierarchy Message-ID: <20151105225200.GA5432@cmpxchg.org> References: <20151027122647.GG9891@dhcp22.suse.cz> <20151027154138.GA4665@cmpxchg.org> <20151027161554.GJ9891@dhcp22.suse.cz> <20151027164227.GB7749@cmpxchg.org> <20151029152546.GG23598@dhcp22.suse.cz> <20151029161009.GA9160@cmpxchg.org> <20151104104239.GG29607@dhcp22.suse.cz> <20151104195037.GA6872@cmpxchg.org> <20151105144002.GB15111@dhcp22.suse.cz> <20151105205522.GA1067@cmpxchg.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20151105205522.GA1067@cmpxchg.org> Sender: owner-linux-mm@kvack.org List-ID: To: Michal Hocko Cc: David Miller , akpm@linux-foundation.org, vdavydov@virtuozzo.com, tj@kernel.org, netdev@vger.kernel.org, linux-mm@kvack.org, cgroups@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Thu, Nov 05, 2015 at 03:55:22PM -0500, Johannes Weiner wrote: > On Thu, Nov 05, 2015 at 03:40:02PM +0100, Michal Hocko wrote: > > This would be true if they moved on to the new cgroup API intentionally. > > The reality is more complicated though. AFAIK sysmted is waiting for > > cgroup2 already and privileged services enable all available resource > > controllers by default as I've learned just recently. > > Have you filed a report with them? I don't think they should turn them > on unless users explicitely configure resource control for the unit. Okay, verified with systemd people that they're not planning on enabling resource control per default. Inflammatory half-truths, man. This is not constructive. -- 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 From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1756917AbbKEWwL (ORCPT ); Thu, 5 Nov 2015 17:52:11 -0500 Received: from gum.cmpxchg.org ([85.214.110.215]:42004 "EHLO gum.cmpxchg.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1752962AbbKEWwI (ORCPT ); Thu, 5 Nov 2015 17:52:08 -0500 Date: Thu, 5 Nov 2015 17:52:00 -0500 From: Johannes Weiner To: Michal Hocko Cc: David Miller , akpm@linux-foundation.org, vdavydov@virtuozzo.com, tj@kernel.org, netdev@vger.kernel.org, linux-mm@kvack.org, cgroups@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH 5/8] mm: memcontrol: account socket memory on unified hierarchy Message-ID: <20151105225200.GA5432@cmpxchg.org> References: <20151027122647.GG9891@dhcp22.suse.cz> <20151027154138.GA4665@cmpxchg.org> <20151027161554.GJ9891@dhcp22.suse.cz> <20151027164227.GB7749@cmpxchg.org> <20151029152546.GG23598@dhcp22.suse.cz> <20151029161009.GA9160@cmpxchg.org> <20151104104239.GG29607@dhcp22.suse.cz> <20151104195037.GA6872@cmpxchg.org> <20151105144002.GB15111@dhcp22.suse.cz> <20151105205522.GA1067@cmpxchg.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20151105205522.GA1067@cmpxchg.org> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.24 (2015-08-30) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Thu, Nov 05, 2015 at 03:55:22PM -0500, Johannes Weiner wrote: > On Thu, Nov 05, 2015 at 03:40:02PM +0100, Michal Hocko wrote: > > This would be true if they moved on to the new cgroup API intentionally. > > The reality is more complicated though. AFAIK sysmted is waiting for > > cgroup2 already and privileged services enable all available resource > > controllers by default as I've learned just recently. > > Have you filed a report with them? I don't think they should turn them > on unless users explicitely configure resource control for the unit. Okay, verified with systemd people that they're not planning on enabling resource control per default. Inflammatory half-truths, man. This is not constructive.