From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mail137.messagelabs.com (mail137.messagelabs.com [216.82.249.19]) by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id C6BA46B00A1 for ; Mon, 19 Jan 2009 03:35:35 -0500 (EST) Received: from d23relay03.au.ibm.com (d23relay03.au.ibm.com [202.81.18.234]) by e23smtp06.au.ibm.com (8.13.1/8.13.1) with ESMTP id n0J8YEGa031068 for ; Mon, 19 Jan 2009 19:34:14 +1100 Received: from d23av03.au.ibm.com (d23av03.au.ibm.com [9.190.234.97]) by d23relay03.au.ibm.com (8.13.8/8.13.8/NCO v9.1) with ESMTP id n0J8YVcC1757412 for ; Mon, 19 Jan 2009 19:34:31 +1100 Received: from d23av03.au.ibm.com (loopback [127.0.0.1]) by d23av03.au.ibm.com (8.12.11.20060308/8.13.3) with ESMTP id n0J8YDB7011453 for ; Mon, 19 Jan 2009 19:34:13 +1100 Date: Mon, 19 Jan 2009 14:04:15 +0530 From: Balbir Singh Subject: Re: [PATCH] memcg: update document to mention swapoff should be test. Message-ID: <20090119083415.GF6039@balbir.in.ibm.com> Reply-To: balbir@linux.vnet.ibm.com References: <20090119155748.acc60988.kamezawa.hiroyu@jp.fujitsu.com> <20090119071220.GE6039@balbir.in.ibm.com> <20090119161508.f8b9d342.kamezawa.hiroyu@jp.fujitsu.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20090119161508.f8b9d342.kamezawa.hiroyu@jp.fujitsu.com> Sender: owner-linux-mm@kvack.org To: KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki Cc: "linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" , "nishimura@mxp.nes.nec.co.jp" , "lizf@cn.fujitsu.com" , "linux-mm@kvack.org" , "akpm@linux-foundation.org" List-ID: * KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki [2009-01-19 16:15:08]: > On Mon, 19 Jan 2009 12:42:20 +0530 > Balbir Singh wrote: > > > * KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki [2009-01-19 15:57:48]: > > > > > From: KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki > > > > > > Considering recently found problem: > > > memcg-fix-refcnt-handling-at-swapoff.patch > > > > > > It's better to mention about swapoff behavior in memcg_test document. > > > > > > Signed-off-by: KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki > > > --- > > > Documentation/cgroups/memcg_test.txt | 24 ++++++++++++++++++++++-- > > > 1 file changed, 22 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-) > > > > > > Index: mmotm-2.6.29-Jan16/Documentation/cgroups/memcg_test.txt > > > =================================================================== > > > --- mmotm-2.6.29-Jan16.orig/Documentation/cgroups/memcg_test.txt > > > +++ mmotm-2.6.29-Jan16/Documentation/cgroups/memcg_test.txt > > > @@ -1,6 +1,6 @@ > > > Memory Resource Controller(Memcg) Implementation Memo. > > > -Last Updated: 2008/12/15 > > > -Base Kernel Version: based on 2.6.28-rc8-mm. > > > +Last Updated: 2009/1/19 > > > +Base Kernel Version: based on 2.6.29-rc2. > > > > > > Because VM is getting complex (one of reasons is memcg...), memcg's behavior > > > is complex. This is a document for memcg's internal behavior. > > > @@ -340,3 +340,23 @@ Under below explanation, we assume CONFI > > > # mount -t cgroup none /cgroup -t cpuset,memory,cpu,devices > > > > > > and do task move, mkdir, rmdir etc...under this. > > > + > > > + 9.7 swapoff. > > > + Besides management of swap is one of complicated parts of memcg, > > > + call path of swap-in at swapoff is not same as usual swap-in path.. > > > + It's worth to be tested explicitly. > > > + > > > + For example, test like following is good. > > > + (Shell-A) > > > + # mount -t cgroup none /cgroup -t memory > > > + # mkdir /cgroup/test > > > + # echo 40M > /cgroup/test/memory.limit_in_bytes > > > + # echo 0 > /cgroup/test/tasks > > > > 0? shouldn't this be pid? Potentially echo $$ > > > > 0 is handled as $$ in cgroup/tasks file. > OK, I remember having the 0 discussion for cgroups. Thanks for clarifying. The test looks good, 0 is a bit confusing, since it is a valid pid not visible to user space... but that is already done and closed. Hence, Acked-by: Balbir Singh -- Balbir -- 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