From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1759725AbXFAHie (ORCPT ); Fri, 1 Jun 2007 03:38:34 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1756254AbXFAHi0 (ORCPT ); Fri, 1 Jun 2007 03:38:26 -0400 Received: from ausmtp06.au.ibm.com ([202.81.18.155]:60120 "EHLO ausmtp06.au.ibm.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1753445AbXFAHiZ (ORCPT ); Fri, 1 Jun 2007 03:38:25 -0400 Message-ID: <465FCCDB.5060008@linux.vnet.ibm.com> Date: Fri, 01 Jun 2007 13:08:03 +0530 From: Balbir Singh Reply-To: balbir@linux.vnet.ibm.com Organization: IBM User-Agent: Thunderbird 1.5.0.10 (X11/20070306) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Pavel Emelianov CC: Andrew Morton , Paul Menage , Balbir Singh , Linux Kernel Mailing List , devel@openvz.org, Kirill Korotaev Subject: Re: [PATCH 7/8] Scanner changes needed to implement per-container scanner References: <465D9739.8070209@openvz.org> <465D9ABD.7050506@openvz.org> <20070530144647.0ace89f3.akpm@linux-foundation.org> <465FC19B.8090905@linux.vnet.ibm.com> <465FCD59.7060301@openvz.org> In-Reply-To: <465FCD59.7060301@openvz.org> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Pavel Emelianov wrote: > Balbir Singh wrote: >> Andrew Morton wrote: >>>> + nr_reclaimed += shrink_zones(priority, zones, sc); >>>> + if (sc->cnt == NULL) >>>> + shrink_slab(sc->nr_scanned, gfp_mask, lru_pages); >>> We don't we shrink slab if called to shrink a container. >>> >>> This is a fundamental design decision, and a design shortcoming. A full >>> discussion of this is absolutely appropriate to the patch changelog. >>> Please don't just hide stuff like this in the patch and leave people >>> wondering, or ignorant. >> Yes, we don't because we do not account for slab usage right now. We account >> only for memory allocated to user space. A good fat comment will help here. >> >> > > I have already added the comment. But the problem is not in that we > do not account for kernel memory. Shrinking slabs won't unmap any > pages from user-space and thus won't help user to charge more. This > will only make kernel suffer from re-creation of objects. I meant the same thing. Thanks for adding the comment. -- Warm Regards, Balbir Singh Linux Technology Center IBM, ISTL