From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: Vivek Goyal <vgoyal@redhat.com>
Subject: Re: [Lsf] IO less throttling and cgroup aware writeback (Was: Re:
 Preliminary Agenda and Activities for LSF)
Date: Thu, 7 Apr 2011 16:04:37 -0400
Message-ID: <20110407200437.GF27778@redhat.com>
References: <20110330222002.GB20849@dastard>
 <20110331141637.GA11139@redhat.com>
 <BANLkTimq_CGOSOmHyvLk9C8DZuqX39RUdg@mail.gmail.com>
 <20110331222756.GC2904@dastard>
 <20110401171838.GD20986@redhat.com>
 <20110401214947.GE6957@dastard>
 <20110405131359.GA14239@redhat.com>
 <20110405225639.GB31057@dastard>
 <BANLkTikDPHcpjmb-EAiX+MQcu7hfE730DQ@mail.gmail.com>
 <20110406230804.GJ31057@dastard>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Cc: Curt Wohlgemuth <curtw@google.com>,
	Greg Thelen <gthelen@google.com>,
	James Bottomley <James.Bottomley@hansenpartnership.com>,
	lsf@lists.linux-foundation.org, linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org
To: Dave Chinner <david@fromorbit.com>
Return-path: <linux-fsdevel-owner@vger.kernel.org>
Received: from mx1.redhat.com ([209.132.183.28]:45009 "EHLO mx1.redhat.com"
	rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP
	id S1756565Ab1DGUEp (ORCPT <rfc822;linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org>);
	Thu, 7 Apr 2011 16:04:45 -0400
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <20110406230804.GJ31057@dastard>
Sender: linux-fsdevel-owner@vger.kernel.org
List-ID: <linux-fsdevel.vger.kernel.org>

On Thu, Apr 07, 2011 at 09:08:04AM +1000, Dave Chinner wrote:

[..]
> > At the very least, when a task is moved from one cgroup to another,
> > we've got a shared inode case.  This probably won't happen more than
> > once for most tasks, but it will likely be common.
> 
> That's not a shared case, that's a transfer of ownership. If the
> task changes groups, you have to charge all it's pages to the new
> group, right? Otherwise you've got a problem where a task that is
> not part of a specific cgroup is still somewhat controlled by it's
> previous cgroup. It would also still influence that previous group
> even though it's no longer a member. Not good for isolation purposes.
> 
> And if you are transfering the state, moving the inode from the
> dirty list of one cgroup to another is trivial and avoids any need
> for the dirty state to be shared....

I am wondering how do you map a task to an inode. Multiple tasks in the
group might have written to same inode. Now which task owns it? 

Thanks
Vivek