From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from sd0109e.au.ibm.com (d23rh905.au.ibm.com [202.81.18.225]) by e23smtp01.au.ibm.com (8.13.1/8.13.1) with ESMTP id l8PFlgFu005097 for ; Wed, 26 Sep 2007 01:47:42 +1000 Received: from d23av03.au.ibm.com (d23av03.au.ibm.com [9.190.234.97]) by sd0109e.au.ibm.com (8.13.8/8.13.8/NCO v8.5) with ESMTP id l8PFpEL2257650 for ; Wed, 26 Sep 2007 01:51:14 +1000 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 l8PFlOsh006322 for ; Wed, 26 Sep 2007 01:47:24 +1000 Message-ID: <46F92D7E.4030903@linux.vnet.ibm.com> Date: Tue, 25 Sep 2007 21:17:10 +0530 From: Balbir Singh Reply-To: balbir@linux.vnet.ibm.com MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/4] [hugetlb] Dynamic huge page pool resizing References: <20070924154638.7565.86666.stgit@kernel> <46F8EF7F.80804@linux.vnet.ibm.com> <1190734249.14295.34.camel@localhost.localdomain> In-Reply-To: <1190734249.14295.34.camel@localhost.localdomain> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-linux-mm@kvack.org Return-Path: To: Adam Litke Cc: linux-mm@kvack.org, libhugetlbfs-devel@lists.sourceforge.net, Andy Whitcroft , Mel Gorman , Bill Irwin , Ken Chen , Dave McCracken List-ID: Adam Litke wrote: > On Tue, 2007-09-25 at 16:52 +0530, Balbir Singh wrote: >> Adam Litke wrote: >>> How it works >>> ============ >>> >>> Upon depletion of the hugetlb pool, rather than reporting an error immediately, >>> first try and allocate the needed huge pages directly from the buddy allocator. >>> Care must be taken to avoid unbounded growth of the hugetlb pool, so the >>> hugetlb filesystem quota is used to limit overall pool size. >>> >> If I understand hugetlb correctly, there is no accounting of hugepages >> to the RSS of any process. Since the pool will no longer be static, >> should we also consider changes to the accounting of hugepages? > > You're right: there is no accounting of huge pages against a process. > This is also the case for the statically allocated pool so this > particular issue exists unconditionally. There are several things > missing: RSS accounting, counting huge pages towards locked_vm limits, > etc... The plan is to address these separately and to fix them all at > once. > I am interested in the accounting and control of hugepages as an extension to the current memory controller, we can of-course do this incrementally. > In the absence of traditional per-process huge page accounting, the > kernel has provided an alternate means for restricting a process' access > to the global hugetlb pool: filesystem permissions and quotas. It's not > ideal, but with this patch series, the filesystem permissions and quotas > remain the effective mechanism for restricting pool growth and > consumption by processes. > OK, thats what I thought. Thanks for sharing your plans -- Warm Regards, Balbir Singh Linux Technology Center IBM, ISTL -- 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