From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: Kamezawa Hiroyuki <kamezawa.hiroyu@jp.fujitsu.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 26/28] memcg: per-memcg kmem shrinking
Date: Mon, 01 Apr 2013 18:35:47 +0900
Message-ID: <515954F3.3030703@jp.fujitsu.com>
References: <1364548450-28254-1-git-send-email-glommer@parallels.com> <1364548450-28254-27-git-send-email-glommer@parallels.com> <515945E3.9090809@jp.fujitsu.com> <515949EB.7020400@parallels.com> <51594CED.4050401@jp.fujitsu.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-2022-JP
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Cc: linux-mm@kvack.org, linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org,
	containers@lists.linux-foundation.org,
	Michal Hocko <mhocko@suse.cz>,
	Johannes Weiner <hannes@cmpxchg.org>,
	Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
	Dave Shrinnker <david@fromorbit.com>,
	Greg Thelen <gthelen@google.com>, hughd@google.com,
	yinghan@google.com, Dave Chinner <dchinner@redhat.com>,
	Mel Gorman <mgorman@suse.de>, Rik van Riel <riel@redhat.com>
To: Glauber Costa <glommer@parallels.com>
Return-path: <linux-fsdevel-owner@vger.kernel.org>
Received: from fgwmail5.fujitsu.co.jp ([192.51.44.35]:41309 "EHLO
	fgwmail5.fujitsu.co.jp" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org
	with ESMTP id S1758651Ab3DAJgR (ORCPT
	<rfc822;linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org>);
	Mon, 1 Apr 2013 05:36:17 -0400
Received: from m3.gw.fujitsu.co.jp (unknown [10.0.50.73])
	by fgwmail5.fujitsu.co.jp (Postfix) with ESMTP id D6F663EE0CE
	for <linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org>; Mon,  1 Apr 2013 18:36:15 +0900 (JST)
Received: from smail (m3 [127.0.0.1])
	by outgoing.m3.gw.fujitsu.co.jp (Postfix) with ESMTP id 69F4445DEC2
	for <linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org>; Mon,  1 Apr 2013 18:36:15 +0900 (JST)
Received: from s3.gw.fujitsu.co.jp (s3.gw.fujitsu.co.jp [10.0.50.93])
	by m3.gw.fujitsu.co.jp (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4AADA45DEBF
	for <linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org>; Mon,  1 Apr 2013 18:36:15 +0900 (JST)
Received: from s3.gw.fujitsu.co.jp (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1])
	by s3.gw.fujitsu.co.jp (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2EDB5E08005
	for <linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org>; Mon,  1 Apr 2013 18:36:15 +0900 (JST)
Received: from ml14.s.css.fujitsu.com (ml14.s.css.fujitsu.com [10.240.81.134])
	by s3.gw.fujitsu.co.jp (Postfix) with ESMTP id CEC38E08001
	for <linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org>; Mon,  1 Apr 2013 18:36:14 +0900 (JST)
In-Reply-To: <51594CED.4050401@jp.fujitsu.com>
Sender: linux-fsdevel-owner@vger.kernel.org
List-ID: <linux-fsdevel.vger.kernel.org>

(2013/04/01 18:01), Kamezawa Hiroyuki wrote:
> (2013/04/01 17:48), Glauber Costa wrote:
>>>> +static int memcg_try_charge_kmem(struct mem_cgroup *memcg, gfp_t gfp, u64 size)
>>>> +{
>>>> +	int retries = MEM_CGROUP_RECLAIM_RETRIES;
>>>
>>> I'm not sure this retry numbers, for anon/file LRUs is suitable for kmem.
>>>
>> Suggestions ?
>>
> 
> I think you did tests.

sorry..

I think you did tests and know what number is good by tests.
If it's the same number to MEM_CGROUP_RECLAIM_RETRIES, I have no objections.
I think no reason is bad.

Thanks,
-Kame