From: Balbir Singh <balbir@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
To: KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki <kamezawa.hiroyu@jp.fujitsu.com>
Cc: Daisuke Nishimura <nishimura@mxp.nes.nec.co.jp>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
"linux-mm@kvack.org" <linux-mm@kvack.org>,
"lizf@cn.fujitsu.com" <lizf@cn.fujitsu.com>,
"menage@google.com" <menage@google.com>,
KOSAKI Motohiro <m-kosaki@ceres.dti.ne.jp>
Subject: Re: Low overhead patches for the memory cgroup controller (v4)
Date: Mon, 15 Jun 2009 08:14:33 +0530 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <4A35B591.7040504@linux.vnet.ibm.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20090615112300.73ef1d8a.kamezawa.hiroyu@jp.fujitsu.com>
KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki wrote:
> On Mon, 15 Jun 2009 11:18:17 +0900
> Daisuke Nishimura <nishimura@mxp.nes.nec.co.jp> wrote:
>
>> On Mon, 15 Jun 2009 00:07:40 +0530, Balbir Singh <balbir@linux.vnet.ibm.com> wrote:
>>> Here is v4 of the patches, please review and comment
>>>
>>> Feature: Remove the overhead associated with the root cgroup
>>>
>>> From: Balbir Singh <balbir@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
>>>
>>> changelog v4 -> v3
>>> 1. Rebase to mmotm 9th june 2009
>>> 2. Remove PageCgroupRoot, we have account LRU flags to indicate that
>>> we do only accounting and no reclaim.
>> hmm, I prefer the previous version of PCG_ACCT_LRU meaning. It can be
>> used to remove annoying list_empty(&pc->lru) and !pc->mem_cgroup checks.
>>
>>> 3. pcg_default_flags has been used again, since PCGF_ROOT is gone,
>>> we set PCGF_ACCT_LRU only in mem_cgroup_add_lru_list
>> It might be safe, but I don't think it's a good idea to touch PCGF_ACCT_LRU
>> outside of zone->lru_lock.
>>
>> IMHO, the most complicated case is a SwapCache which has been read ahead by
>> a *different* cpu from the cpu doing do_swap_page(). Those SwapCache can be
>> on page_vec and be drained to LRU asymmetrically with do_swap_page().
>> Well, yes it would be safe just because PCGF_ACCT_LRU would not be set
>> if PCGF_USED has not been set, but I don't think it's a good idea to touch
>> PCGF_ACCT_LRU outside of zone->lru_lock anyway.
>>
>>
>> Doesn't a patch like below work for you ?
>> Lightly tested under global memory pressure(w/o memcg's memory pressure)
>> on a small machine(just a bit modified from then though).
>>
OK, so you like the older meaning and implementation, the code seems fine to me,
I like the removal of list_empty() checks that you and Kame have proposed.
--
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: <a href=mailto:"dont@kvack.org"> email@kvack.org </a>
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2009-06-15 2:43 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 39+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2009-05-15 17:45 [RFC] Low overhead patches for the memory cgroup controller (v2) KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki
2009-05-15 17:45 ` KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki
2009-05-15 18:16 ` Balbir Singh
2009-05-15 18:16 ` Balbir Singh
2009-05-18 10:11 ` KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki
2009-05-18 10:11 ` KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki
2009-05-18 10:45 ` Balbir Singh
2009-05-18 10:45 ` Balbir Singh
2009-05-18 16:01 ` KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki
2009-05-18 16:01 ` KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki
2009-05-19 13:18 ` Balbir Singh
2009-05-31 23:51 ` Balbir Singh
2009-06-01 23:57 ` KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki
2009-06-05 5:31 ` Low overhead patches for the memory cgroup controller (v3) Balbir Singh
2009-06-05 5:51 ` KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki
2009-06-05 9:33 ` Balbir Singh
2009-06-08 0:20 ` Daisuke Nishimura
2009-06-05 6:05 ` Daisuke Nishimura
2009-06-05 9:47 ` Balbir Singh
2009-06-08 0:03 ` Daisuke Nishimura
2009-06-05 6:43 ` Daisuke Nishimura
2009-06-14 18:37 ` Low overhead patches for the memory cgroup controller (v4) Balbir Singh
2009-06-15 2:04 ` KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki
2009-06-15 2:18 ` Daisuke Nishimura
2009-06-15 2:23 ` KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki
2009-06-15 2:44 ` Balbir Singh [this message]
2009-06-15 3:00 ` Balbir Singh
2009-06-15 3:09 ` Daisuke Nishimura
2009-06-15 3:22 ` Balbir Singh
2009-06-15 3:46 ` Daisuke Nishimura
2009-06-15 4:22 ` Balbir Singh
2009-05-17 4:15 ` [RFC] Low overhead patches for the memory cgroup controller (v2) Balbir Singh
2009-05-17 4:15 ` Balbir Singh
2009-06-01 4:25 ` Daisuke Nishimura
2009-06-01 4:25 ` Daisuke Nishimura
2009-06-01 5:01 ` Daisuke Nishimura
2009-06-01 5:01 ` Daisuke Nishimura
2009-06-01 5:49 ` Balbir Singh
2009-06-01 5:49 ` Balbir Singh
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=4A35B591.7040504@linux.vnet.ibm.com \
--to=balbir@linux.vnet.ibm.com \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=kamezawa.hiroyu@jp.fujitsu.com \
--cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
--cc=lizf@cn.fujitsu.com \
--cc=m-kosaki@ceres.dti.ne.jp \
--cc=menage@google.com \
--cc=nishimura@mxp.nes.nec.co.jp \
/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.