From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Glauber Costa Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 02/13] memcg: Kernel memory accounting infrastructure. Date: Mon, 12 Mar 2012 16:38:26 +0400 Message-ID: <4F5DEE42.6050607@parallels.com> References: <1331325556-16447-1-git-send-email-ssouhlal@FreeBSD.org> <1331325556-16447-3-git-send-email-ssouhlal@FreeBSD.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: In-Reply-To: <1331325556-16447-3-git-send-email-ssouhlal-HZy0K5TPuP5AfugRpC6u6w@public.gmane.org> Sender: cgroups-owner-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org List-ID: Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format="flowed" To: Suleiman Souhlal Cc: cgroups-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org, suleiman-hpIqsD4AKlfQT0dZR+AlfA@public.gmane.org, kamezawa.hiroyu-+CUm20s59erQFUHtdCDX3A@public.gmane.org, penberg-DgEjT+Ai2ygdnm+yROfE0A@public.gmane.org, cl-vYTEC60ixJUAvxtiuMwx3w@public.gmane.org, yinghan-hpIqsD4AKlfQT0dZR+AlfA@public.gmane.org, hughd-hpIqsD4AKlfQT0dZR+AlfA@public.gmane.org, gthelen-hpIqsD4AKlfQT0dZR+AlfA@public.gmane.org, peterz-wEGCiKHe2LqWVfeAwA7xHQ@public.gmane.org, dan.magenheimer-QHcLZuEGTsvQT0dZR+AlfA@public.gmane.org, hannes-druUgvl0LCNAfugRpC6u6w@public.gmane.org, mgorman-l3A5Bk7waGM@public.gmane.org, James.Bottomley-d9PhHud1JfjCXq6kfMZ53/egYHeGw8Jk@public.gmane.org, linux-mm-Bw31MaZKKs3YtjvyW6yDsg@public.gmane.org, devel-GEFAQzZX7r8dnm+yROfE0A@public.gmane.org, linux-kernel-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org On 03/10/2012 12:39 AM, Suleiman Souhlal wrote: > +#ifdef CONFIG_CGROUP_MEM_RES_CTLR_KMEM > +int > +memcg_charge_kmem(struct mem_cgroup *memcg, gfp_t gfp, long long delta) > +{ > + struct res_counter *fail_res; > + struct mem_cgroup *_memcg; > + int may_oom, ret; > + > + may_oom = (gfp& __GFP_WAIT)&& (gfp& __GFP_FS)&& > + !(gfp& __GFP_NORETRY); > + > + ret = 0; > + > + _memcg = memcg; > + if (memcg&& !mem_cgroup_test_flag(memcg, > + MEMCG_INDEPENDENT_KMEM_LIMIT)) { > + ret = __mem_cgroup_try_charge(NULL, gfp, delta / PAGE_SIZE, > + &_memcg, may_oom); > + if (ret == -ENOMEM) > + return ret; > + } > + > + if (memcg&& _memcg == memcg) > + ret = res_counter_charge(&memcg->kmem, delta,&fail_res); > + > + return ret; > +} > + > +void Ok. So I've spent most of the day today trying to come up with a way not to kill the whole performance we gain from consume_stock() by this res_counter_charge() to kmem afterwards... You mentioned you want to still be able to bill to memcg->kmem mostly for debugging/display purposes. So we're surely not using all of the res_counter infrastructure (limiting, soft limits, etc) I was thinking: Can't we have a percpu_counter that we use for this purpose when !kmem_independent ? we may not even need to bloat the struct, since we can fold it into a union with struct res_counter kmem (which is bigger than a percpu counter anyway). We just need to be a bit more careful not to allow kmem_independent to change when we already have charges to any of them (but we need to do it anyway)