From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mail-pg0-f71.google.com (mail-pg0-f71.google.com [74.125.83.71]) by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0E6306B038A for ; Tue, 21 Mar 2017 11:18:19 -0400 (EDT) Received: by mail-pg0-f71.google.com with SMTP id t143so104650606pgb.1 for ; Tue, 21 Mar 2017 08:18:19 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mga02.intel.com (mga02.intel.com. [134.134.136.20]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPS id h21si21553896pgj.54.2017.03.21.08.18.18 for (version=TLS1_2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128/128); Tue, 21 Mar 2017 08:18:18 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: <1490109496.17719.15.camel@linux.intel.com> Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 0/5] mm: support parallel free of memory From: Tim Chen Date: Tue, 21 Mar 2017 11:18:16 -0400 In-Reply-To: <20170316090732.GF30501@dhcp22.suse.cz> References: <1489568404-7817-1-git-send-email-aaron.lu@intel.com> <20170315141813.GB32626@dhcp22.suse.cz> <20170315154406.GF2442@aaronlu.sh.intel.com> <20170315162843.GA27197@dhcp22.suse.cz> <1489613914.2733.96.camel@linux.intel.com> <20170316090732.GF30501@dhcp22.suse.cz> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Sender: owner-linux-mm@kvack.org List-ID: To: Michal Hocko Cc: Aaron Lu , linux-mm@kvack.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Dave Hansen , Tim Chen , Andrew Morton , Ying Huang On Thu, 2017-03-16 at 10:07 +0100, Michal Hocko wrote: >A > > > the main problem is that kworkers will not belong to the same cpu group > > > and so they will not be throttled properly. > > You do have a point that this page freeing activities should strive to > > affect other threads not in the same cgroup minimally. > > > > On the other hand, we also don't do this throttling of kworkersA > > today (e.g. pdflush) according to the cgroup it is doing work for. > Yes, I am not saying this a new problem. I just wanted to point out that > this is something to consider here. I believe this should be fixable. > Worker can attach to the same cgroup the initiator had for example > (assuming the cgroup core allows that which is something would have to > be checked). Instead of attaching the kworders to the cgroup of the initiator, I wonder what people think about creating a separate kworker cgroup.A The administrator can set limit on its cpu resource bandwidth if he/she does not want such kworkers perturbing the system. Tim -- 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