Re: [PATCH 4/4] Memory controller soft limit reclaim on contention (v6)

[Balbir Singh <balbir@linux.vnet.ibm.com>]

* KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki <kamezawa.hiroyu@jp.fujitsu.com> [2009-03-16 18:03:08]:

> On Mon, 16 Mar 2009 17:49:43 +0900
> KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki <kamezawa.hiroyu@jp.fujitsu.com> wrote:
> 
> > On Mon, 16 Mar 2009 14:05:12 +0530
> > Balbir Singh <balbir@linux.vnet.ibm.com> wrote:
> 
> > For example, shrink_slab() is not called. and this must be called.
> > 
> > For exmaple, we may have to add 
> >  sc->call_shrink_slab
> > flag and set it "true" at soft limit reclaim. 
> > 
> At least, this check will be necessary in v7, I think.
> shrink_slab() should be called.

Why do you think so? So here is the design

1. If a cgroup was using over its soft limit, we believe that this
   cgroup created overall memory contention and caused the page
   reclaimer to get activated. If we can solve the situation by
   reclaiming from this cgroup, why do we need to invoke shrink_slab?

If the concern is that we are not following the traditional reclaim,
soft limit reclaim can be followed by unconditional reclaim, but I
believe this is not necessary. Remember, we wake up kswapd that will
call shrink_slab if needed.

-- 
	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>