From: Balbir Singh <balbir@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
To: linux-mm@kvack.org
Cc: Sudhir Kumar <skumar@linux.vnet.ibm.com>,
YAMAMOTO Takashi <yamamoto@valinux.co.jp>,
Bharata B Rao <bharata@in.ibm.com>,
Paul Menage <menage@google.com>,
lizf@cn.fujitsu.com, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
KOSAKI Motohiro <kosaki.motohiro@jp.fujitsu.com>,
David Rientjes <rientjes@google.com>,
Pavel Emelianov <xemul@openvz.org>,
Dhaval Giani <dhaval@linux.vnet.ibm.com>,
Balbir Singh <balbir@linux.vnet.ibm.com>,
Rik van Riel <riel@redhat.com>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki <kamezawa.hiroyu@jp.fujitsu.com>
Subject: [RFC][PATCH 0/4] Memory controller soft limit patches (v2)
Date: Mon, 16 Feb 2009 16:38:44 +0530 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20090216110844.29795.17804.sendpatchset@localhost.localdomain> (raw)
From: Balbir Singh <balbir@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
Changelog v2...v1
1. Soft limits now support hierarchies
2. Use spinlocks instead of mutexes for synchronization of the RB tree
Here is v2 of the new soft limit implementation. Soft limits is a new feature
for the memory resource controller, something similar has existed in the
group scheduler in the form of shares. The CPU controllers interpretation
of shares is very different though. We'll compare shares and soft limits
below.
Soft limits are the most useful feature to have for environments where
the administrator wants to overcommit the system, such that only on memory
contention do the limits become active. The current soft limits implementation
provides a soft_limit_in_bytes interface for the memory controller and not
for memory+swap controller. The implementation maintains an RB-Tree of groups
that exceed their soft limit and starts reclaiming from the group that
exceeds this limit by the maximum amount.
This is an RFC implementation and is not meant for inclusion
TODOs
1. The current implementation maintains the delta from the soft limit
and pushes back groups to their soft limits, a ratio of delta/soft_limit
is more useful
2. It would be nice to have more targetted reclaim (in terms of pages to
recalim) interface. So that groups are pushed back, close to their soft
limits.
Tests
-----
I've run two memory intensive workloads with differing soft limits and
seen that they are pushed back to their soft limit on contention. Their usage
was their soft limit plus additional memory that they were able to grab
on the system.
Please review, comment.
Series
------
memcg-soft-limit-documentation.patch
memcg-add-soft-limit-interface.patch
memcg-organize-over-soft-limit-groups.patch
memcg-soft-limit-reclaim-on-contention.patch
---
0 files changed, 0 insertions(+), 0 deletions(-)
--
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: <a href=mailto:"dont@kvack.org"> email@kvack.org </a>
next reply other threads:[~2009-02-16 11:08 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 19+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2009-02-16 11:08 Balbir Singh [this message]
2009-02-16 11:08 ` [RFC][PATCH 1/4] Memory controller soft limit documentation (v2) Balbir Singh
2009-02-16 11:08 ` [RFC][PATCH 2/4] Memory controller soft limit interface (v2) Balbir Singh
2009-02-16 11:09 ` [RFC][PATCH 3/4] Memory controller soft limit organize cgroups (v2) Balbir Singh
2009-02-17 1:00 ` KOSAKI Motohiro
2009-02-17 3:24 ` Balbir Singh
2009-02-16 11:09 ` [RFC][PATCH 4/4] Memory controller soft limit reclaim on contention (v2) Balbir Singh
2009-02-17 1:20 ` KOSAKI Motohiro
2009-02-17 3:12 ` Balbir Singh
2009-02-17 0:05 ` [RFC][PATCH 0/4] Memory controller soft limit patches (v2) KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki
2009-02-17 3:05 ` Balbir Singh
2009-02-17 4:03 ` KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki
2009-02-17 4:20 ` KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki
2009-02-17 4:42 ` Balbir Singh
2009-02-17 4:41 ` Balbir Singh
2009-02-17 5:10 ` KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki
2009-02-17 5:39 ` Balbir Singh
2009-02-17 6:36 ` KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki
2009-02-17 6:43 ` Balbir Singh
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20090216110844.29795.17804.sendpatchset@localhost.localdomain \
--to=balbir@linux.vnet.ibm.com \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=bharata@in.ibm.com \
--cc=dhaval@linux.vnet.ibm.com \
--cc=kamezawa.hiroyu@jp.fujitsu.com \
--cc=kosaki.motohiro@jp.fujitsu.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
--cc=lizf@cn.fujitsu.com \
--cc=menage@google.com \
--cc=riel@redhat.com \
--cc=rientjes@google.com \
--cc=skumar@linux.vnet.ibm.com \
--cc=xemul@openvz.org \
--cc=yamamoto@valinux.co.jp \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).