From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Kamezawa Hiroyuki Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 23/25] memcg: propagate kmem limiting information to children Date: Mon, 18 Jun 2012 21:37:01 +0900 Message-ID: <4FDF20ED.4090401@jp.fujitsu.com> References: <1340015298-14133-1-git-send-email-glommer@parallels.com> <1340015298-14133-24-git-send-email-glommer@parallels.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: In-Reply-To: <1340015298-14133-24-git-send-email-glommer-bzQdu9zFT3WakBO8gow8eQ@public.gmane.org> Sender: cgroups-owner-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org List-ID: Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" To: Glauber Costa Cc: linux-mm-Bw31MaZKKs3YtjvyW6yDsg@public.gmane.org, Pekka Enberg , Cristoph Lameter , David Rientjes , cgroups-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org, devel-GEFAQzZX7r8dnm+yROfE0A@public.gmane.org, linux-kernel-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org, Frederic Weisbecker , Suleiman Souhlal , Pekka Enberg , Michal Hocko , Johannes Weiner (2012/06/18 19:28), Glauber Costa wrote: > The current memcg slab cache management fails to present satisfatory hierarchical > behavior in the following scenario: > > -> /cgroups/memory/A/B/C > > * kmem limit set at A > * A and B empty taskwise > * bash in C does find / > > Because kmem_accounted is a boolean that was not set for C, no accounting > would be done. This is, however, not what we expect. > Hmm....do we need this new routines even while we have mem_cgroup_iter() ? Doesn't this work ? struct mem_cgroup { ..... bool kmem_accounted_this; atomic_t kmem_accounted; .... } at set limit ....set_limit(memcg) { if (newly accounted) { mem_cgroup_iter() { atomic_inc(&iter->kmem_accounted) } } else { mem_cgroup_iter() { atomic_dec(&iter->kmem_accounted); } } hm ? Then, you can see kmem is accounted or not by atomic_read(&memcg->kmem_accounted); Thanks, -Kame From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from psmtp.com (na3sys010amx170.postini.com [74.125.245.170]) by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 8550F6B0073 for ; Mon, 18 Jun 2012 08:39:19 -0400 (EDT) Received: from m1.gw.fujitsu.co.jp (unknown [10.0.50.71]) by fgwmail6.fujitsu.co.jp (Postfix) with ESMTP id 293E53EE0B5 for ; Mon, 18 Jun 2012 21:39:18 +0900 (JST) Received: from smail (m1 [127.0.0.1]) by outgoing.m1.gw.fujitsu.co.jp (Postfix) with ESMTP id F36E945DE59 for ; Mon, 18 Jun 2012 21:39:17 +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 DAED745DE56 for ; Mon, 18 Jun 2012 21:39:17 +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 CD8761DB804F for ; Mon, 18 Jun 2012 21:39:17 +0900 (JST) Received: from m1000.s.css.fujitsu.com (m1000.s.css.fujitsu.com [10.240.81.136]) by s1.gw.fujitsu.co.jp (Postfix) with ESMTP id 865D01DB8047 for ; Mon, 18 Jun 2012 21:39:17 +0900 (JST) Message-ID: <4FDF20ED.4090401@jp.fujitsu.com> Date: Mon, 18 Jun 2012 21:37:01 +0900 From: Kamezawa Hiroyuki MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 23/25] memcg: propagate kmem limiting information to children References: <1340015298-14133-1-git-send-email-glommer@parallels.com> <1340015298-14133-24-git-send-email-glommer@parallels.com> In-Reply-To: <1340015298-14133-24-git-send-email-glommer@parallels.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-2022-JP Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-linux-mm@kvack.org List-ID: To: Glauber Costa Cc: linux-mm@kvack.org, Pekka Enberg , Cristoph Lameter , David Rientjes , cgroups@vger.kernel.org, devel@openvz.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Frederic Weisbecker , Suleiman Souhlal , Pekka Enberg , Michal Hocko , Johannes Weiner (2012/06/18 19:28), Glauber Costa wrote: > The current memcg slab cache management fails to present satisfatory hierarchical > behavior in the following scenario: > > -> /cgroups/memory/A/B/C > > * kmem limit set at A > * A and B empty taskwise > * bash in C does find / > > Because kmem_accounted is a boolean that was not set for C, no accounting > would be done. This is, however, not what we expect. > Hmm....do we need this new routines even while we have mem_cgroup_iter() ? Doesn't this work ? struct mem_cgroup { ..... bool kmem_accounted_this; atomic_t kmem_accounted; .... } at set limit ....set_limit(memcg) { if (newly accounted) { mem_cgroup_iter() { atomic_inc(&iter->kmem_accounted) } } else { mem_cgroup_iter() { atomic_dec(&iter->kmem_accounted); } } hm ? Then, you can see kmem is accounted or not by atomic_read(&memcg->kmem_accounted); Thanks, -Kame -- 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 S1751342Ab2FRMjU (ORCPT ); Mon, 18 Jun 2012 08:39:20 -0400 Received: from fgwmail5.fujitsu.co.jp ([192.51.44.35]:57997 "EHLO fgwmail5.fujitsu.co.jp" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1750756Ab2FRMjT (ORCPT ); Mon, 18 Jun 2012 08:39:19 -0400 X-SecurityPolicyCheck: OK by SHieldMailChecker v1.7.4 Message-ID: <4FDF20ED.4090401@jp.fujitsu.com> Date: Mon, 18 Jun 2012 21:37:01 +0900 From: Kamezawa Hiroyuki User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.0; rv:12.0) Gecko/20120428 Thunderbird/12.0.1 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Glauber Costa CC: linux-mm@kvack.org, Pekka Enberg , Cristoph Lameter , David Rientjes , cgroups@vger.kernel.org, devel@openvz.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Frederic Weisbecker , Suleiman Souhlal , Pekka Enberg , Michal Hocko , Johannes Weiner Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 23/25] memcg: propagate kmem limiting information to children References: <1340015298-14133-1-git-send-email-glommer@parallels.com> <1340015298-14133-24-git-send-email-glommer@parallels.com> In-Reply-To: <1340015298-14133-24-git-send-email-glommer@parallels.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-2022-JP Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org (2012/06/18 19:28), Glauber Costa wrote: > The current memcg slab cache management fails to present satisfatory hierarchical > behavior in the following scenario: > > -> /cgroups/memory/A/B/C > > * kmem limit set at A > * A and B empty taskwise > * bash in C does find / > > Because kmem_accounted is a boolean that was not set for C, no accounting > would be done. This is, however, not what we expect. > Hmm....do we need this new routines even while we have mem_cgroup_iter() ? Doesn't this work ? struct mem_cgroup { ..... bool kmem_accounted_this; atomic_t kmem_accounted; .... } at set limit ....set_limit(memcg) { if (newly accounted) { mem_cgroup_iter() { atomic_inc(&iter->kmem_accounted) } } else { mem_cgroup_iter() { atomic_dec(&iter->kmem_accounted); } } hm ? Then, you can see kmem is accounted or not by atomic_read(&memcg->kmem_accounted); Thanks, -Kame