linux-mm.kvack.org archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Michal Hocko <mhocko@suse.cz>
To: Ying Han <yinghan@google.com>
Cc: linux-mm@kvack.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
	Hugh Dickins <hughd@google.com>,
	Suleiman Souhlal <suleiman@google.com>
Subject: Re: [RFC 0/3] Implementation of cgroup isolation
Date: Tue, 29 Mar 2011 09:53:55 +0200	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20110329075355.GC30671@tiehlicka.suse.cz> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <AANLkTi=CPMxOg3juDiD-_hnBsXKdZ+at+i9c1YYM=vv1@mail.gmail.com>

Hi,

On Mon 28-03-11 11:01:18, Ying Han wrote:
> On Mon, Mar 28, 2011 at 2:39 AM, Michal Hocko <mhocko@suse.cz> wrote:
> > Hi all,
> >
> > Memory cgroups can be currently used to throttle memory usage of a group of
> > processes. It, however, cannot be used for an isolation of processes from
> > the rest of the system because all the pages that belong to the group are
> > also placed on the global LRU lists and so they are eligible for the global
> > memory reclaim.
> >
> > This patchset aims at providing an opt-in memory cgroup isolation. This
> > means that a cgroup can be configured to be isolated from the rest of the
> > system by means of cgroup virtual filesystem (/dev/memctl/group/memory.isolated).
> 
> Thank you Hugh pointing me to the thread. We are working on similar
> problem in memcg currently
> 
> Here is the problem we see:
> 1. In memcg, a page is both on per-memcg-per-zone lru and global-lru.
> 2. Global memory reclaim will throw page away regardless of cgroup.
> 3. The zone->lru_lock is shared between per-memcg-per-zone lru and global-lru.

This is the primary motivation for the patchset. Except that I do not
insist on the strict isolation because I found opt-in approach less
invasive because you have to know what you are doing while you are
setting up a group. If the thing is enabled by default we can see many
side-effects during the reclaim, I am afraid.

> And we know:
> 1. We shouldn't do global reclaim since it breaks memory isolation.
> 2. There is no need for a page to be on both LRU list, especially
> after having per-memcg background reclaim.
> 
> So our approach is to take off page from global lru after it is
> charged to a memcg. Only pages allocated at root cgroup remains in
> global LRU, and each memcg reclaims pages on its isolated LRU.

This sounds like an instance where all cgroups are isolated by default
(this can be set by mem_cgroup->isolated = 1).

Thanks
-- 
Michal Hocko
SUSE Labs
SUSE LINUX s.r.o.
Lihovarska 1060/12
190 00 Praha 9    
Czech Republic

--
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/ .
Fight unfair telecom internet charges in Canada: sign http://stopthemeter.ca/
Don't email: <a href=mailto:"dont@kvack.org"> email@kvack.org </a>

      parent reply	other threads:[~2011-03-29  7:53 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 35+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2011-03-28  9:39 [RFC 0/3] Implementation of cgroup isolation Michal Hocko
2011-03-28  9:39 ` [RFC 1/3] Add mem_cgroup->isolated and configuration knob Michal Hocko
2011-03-28  9:39 ` [RFC 2/3] Implement isolated LRU cgroups Michal Hocko
2011-03-28  9:40 ` [RFC 3/3] Do not shrink isolated groups from the global reclaim Michal Hocko
2011-03-28 11:03 ` [RFC 0/3] Implementation of cgroup isolation KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki
2011-03-28 11:44   ` Michal Hocko
2011-03-29  0:09     ` KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki
2011-03-29  7:32       ` Michal Hocko
2011-03-29  7:51         ` KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki
2011-03-29  8:59           ` Michal Hocko
2011-03-29  9:41             ` KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki
2011-03-29 11:18               ` Michal Hocko
2011-03-29 13:15                 ` Zhu Yanhai
2011-03-29 13:42                   ` Michal Hocko
2011-03-29 14:02                     ` Zhu Yanhai
2011-03-29 14:08                       ` Zhu Yanhai
2011-03-30  7:42                       ` Michal Hocko
2011-03-30  5:32               ` Ying Han
2011-03-29 15:53   ` Balbir Singh
2011-03-30  8:18     ` Michal Hocko
2011-03-30 17:59       ` Ying Han
2011-03-31  9:53         ` Michal Hocko
2011-03-31 18:10           ` Ying Han
2011-04-01 14:04             ` Michal Hocko
2011-03-31 10:01       ` Balbir Singh
2011-03-28 18:01 ` Ying Han
2011-03-29  0:12   ` KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki
2011-03-29  0:37     ` Ying Han
2011-03-29  0:47       ` KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki
2011-03-29  2:29         ` KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki
2011-03-29  3:02           ` Ying Han
2011-03-29  2:46         ` Ying Han
2011-03-29  2:45           ` KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki
2011-03-29  4:03             ` Ying Han
2011-03-29  7:53   ` Michal Hocko [this message]

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=20110329075355.GC30671@tiehlicka.suse.cz \
    --to=mhocko@suse.cz \
    --cc=hughd@google.com \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
    --cc=suleiman@google.com \
    --cc=yinghan@google.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).