From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1754968AbYIZJeW (ORCPT ); Fri, 26 Sep 2008 05:34:22 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1752532AbYIZJeO (ORCPT ); Fri, 26 Sep 2008 05:34:14 -0400 Received: from E23SMTP01.au.ibm.com ([202.81.18.162]:58990 "EHLO e23smtp01.au.ibm.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1752270AbYIZJeN (ORCPT ); Fri, 26 Sep 2008 05:34:13 -0400 Message-ID: <48DCAC1D.9020802@linux.vnet.ibm.com> Date: Fri, 26 Sep 2008 15:02:13 +0530 From: Balbir Singh Reply-To: balbir@linux.vnet.ibm.com Organization: IBM User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.16 (X11/20080725) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki CC: "linux-mm@kvack.org" , "nishimura@mxp.nes.nec.co.jp" , "xemul@openvz.org" , Andrew Morton , LKML , Dave Hansen , ryov@valinux.co.jp Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/12] memcg avoid accounting special mappings not on LRU References: <20080925151124.25898d22.kamezawa.hiroyu@jp.fujitsu.com> <20080925151307.f9cf352f.kamezawa.hiroyu@jp.fujitsu.com> <48DC9C92.4000408@linux.vnet.ibm.com> <20080926181726.359c77a8.kamezawa.hiroyu@jp.fujitsu.com> In-Reply-To: <20080926181726.359c77a8.kamezawa.hiroyu@jp.fujitsu.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki wrote: > On Fri, 26 Sep 2008 13:55:54 +0530 > Balbir Singh wrote: > >> KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki wrote: >>> There are not-on-LRU pages which can be mapped and they are not worth to >>> be accounted. (becasue we can't shrink them and need dirty codes to handle >>> specical case) We'd like to make use of usual objrmap/radix-tree's protcol >>> and don't want to account out-of-vm's control pages. >>> >>> When special_mapping_fault() is called, page->mapping is tend to be NULL >>> and it's charged as Anonymous page. >>> insert_page() also handles some special pages from drivers. >>> >>> This patch is for avoiding to account special pages. >>> >> Hmm... I am a little concerned that with these changes actual usage will much >> more than what we report in memory.usage_in_bytes. Why not move them to >> non-reclaimable LRU list as unevictable pages (once those patches go in, we can >> push this as well). > > Because they are not on LRU ...i.e. !PageLRU(page) > I understand.. Thanks for clarifying.. my concern is w.r.t accounting, we account it in RSS (file RSS). -- Balbir