From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Balbir Singh Subject: Re: [PATCH -mm 0/5] swapcgroup (v3) Date: Sat, 05 Jul 2008 12:22:25 +0530 Message-ID: <486F1A29.4020407@linux.vnet.ibm.com> References: <20080704151536.e5384231.nishimura@mxp.nes.nec.co.jp> Reply-To: balbir-23VcF4HTsmIX0ybBhKVfKdBPR1lH4CV8@public.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: In-Reply-To: <20080704151536.e5384231.nishimura-YQH0OdQVrdy45+QrQBaojngSJqDPrsil@public.gmane.org> List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Sender: containers-bounces-cunTk1MwBs9QetFLy7KEm3xJsTq8ys+cHZ5vskTnxNA@public.gmane.org Errors-To: containers-bounces-cunTk1MwBs9QetFLy7KEm3xJsTq8ys+cHZ5vskTnxNA@public.gmane.org To: Daisuke Nishimura Cc: YAMAMOTO Takashi , Linux MM , KOSAKI Motohiro , Linux Containers , Hugh Dickins , Pavel Emelyanov List-Id: containers.vger.kernel.org Daisuke Nishimura wrote: > Hi. > > This is new version of swapcgroup. > > Major changes from previous version > - Rebased on 2.6.26-rc5-mm3. > The new -mm has been released, but these patches > can be applied on 2.6.26-rc8-mm1 too with only some offset warnings. > I tested these patches on 2.6.26-rc5-mm3 with some fixes about memory, > and it seems to work fine. > - (NEW) Implemented force_empty. > Currently, it simply uncharges all the charges from the group. > > Patches > - [1/5] add cgroup files > - [2/5] add a member to swap_info_struct > - [3/5] implement charge and uncharge > - [4/5] modify vm_swap_full() > - [5/5] implement force_empty > > ToDo(in my thought. Feel free to add some others here.) > - need some documentation > Add to memory.txt? or create a new documentation file? > I think memory.txt is good. But then, we'll need to add a Table of Contents to it, so that swap controller documentation can be located easily. > - add option to disable only this feature > I'm wondering if this option is needed. > memcg has already the boot option to disable it. > Is there any case where memory should be accounted but swap should not? > That depends on what use case you are trying to provide. Let's say I needed backward compatibility with 2.6.25, then I would account for memory and leave out swap (even though we have swap controller). > - hierarchy support > - move charges along with task > Both of them need more discussion. > Yes, they do. -- Warm Regards, Balbir Singh Linux Technology Center IBM, ISTL