From: Balbir Singh <balbir@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
To: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki <kamezawa.hiroyu@jp.fujitsu.com>
Cc: linux-mm@kvack.org, Balbir Singh <balbir@linux.vnet.ibm.com>,
lizf@cn.fujitsu.com, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
KOSAKI Motohiro <kosaki.motohiro@jp.fujitsu.com>
Subject: [RFC][PATCH 0/5] Memory controller soft limit patches (v9)
Date: Fri, 10 Jul 2009 18:29:50 +0530 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20090710125950.5610.99139.sendpatchset@balbir-laptop> (raw)
From: Balbir Singh <balbir@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
New Feature: Soft limits for memory resource controller.
Here is v9 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.
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.
v9 attempts to address several review comments for v8 by Kamezawa, including
moving over to an event based approach for soft limit rb tree management,
simplification of data structure names and many others. Comments not
addressed have been answered via email or I've added comments in the code.
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
might be more useful
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. Soft limit can take a while before we see the expected
results.
I ran overhead tests (reaim) and found no significant overhead as a result
of these patches.
Please review, comment.
Series
------
memcg-soft-limits-documentation.patch
memcg-soft-limits-interface.patch
memcg-soft-limits-organize.patch
memcg-soft-limits-refactor-reclaim-bits
memcg-soft-limits-reclaim-on-contention.patch
--
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:[~2009-07-10 12:36 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 15+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2009-07-10 12:59 Balbir Singh [this message]
2009-07-10 12:59 ` [RFC][PATCH 1/5] Memory controller soft limit documentation (v9) Balbir Singh
2009-07-10 13:00 ` [RFC][PATCH 2/5] Memory controller soft limit interface (v9) Balbir Singh
2009-07-10 13:00 ` [RFC][PATCH 3/5] Memory controller soft limit organize cgroups (v9) Balbir Singh
2009-07-10 13:00 ` [RFC][PATCH 4/5] Memory controller soft limit refactor reclaim flags (v9) Balbir Singh
2009-07-10 13:00 ` [RFC][PATCH 5/5] Memory controller soft limit reclaim on contention (v9) Balbir Singh
2009-07-20 15:20 ` KOSAKI Motohiro
2009-07-20 15:47 ` Balbir Singh
2009-07-15 4:08 ` [RFC][PATCH 0/5] Memory controller soft limit patches (v9) Balbir Singh
2009-07-15 4:33 ` KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki
2009-07-15 5:25 ` Balbir Singh
2009-07-15 5:28 ` KOSAKI Motohiro
2009-07-15 5:32 ` Balbir Singh
2009-07-20 15:48 ` Balbir Singh
2009-07-21 0:03 ` KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki
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=20090710125950.5610.99139.sendpatchset@balbir-laptop \
--to=balbir@linux.vnet.ibm.com \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--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 \
/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).