public inbox for linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki <kamezawa.hiroyu@jp.fujitsu.com>
To: Tejun Heo <tj@kernel.org>
Cc: Johannes Weiner <hannes@cmpxchg.org>,
	Glauber Costa <glommer@parallels.com>,
	Frederic Weisbecker <fweisbec@gmail.com>,
	Hugh Dickins <hughd@google.com>,
	Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
	Daniel Walsh <dwalsh@redhat.com>,
	"Daniel P. Berrange" <berrange@redhat.com>,
	Li Zefan <lizf@cn.fujitsu.com>,
	LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
	Cgroups <cgroups@vger.kernel.org>,
	Containers <containers@lists.linux-foundation.org>
Subject: Re: [RFD] Merge task counter into memcg
Date: Fri, 13 Apr 2012 10:42:24 +0900	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <4F878480.60505@jp.fujitsu.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20120412174155.GC13069@google.com>

(2012/04/13 2:41), Tejun Heo wrote:

> Hello, Johannes.

> I'm still split on the issue.
> 
> * #tasks as unit of accounting / limiting is well understood (or at
>   least known).  I think this holds the same to #open files, to a
>   lesser extent.  It means there are and will continue to be people
>   wanting them.  So, they have some value in familiarity - "but... I
>   want to limit the resources consumed by tasks cuz that's what I
>   know!" factor.
> 
> * People could want counting and limiting #tasks or #open files
>   without the overhead of tracking all memory resources.  This stems
>   from the same reason #tasks was used for this sort of things in the
>   first place.  Counting tasks or open files tends to be easier and
>   cheaper than tracking all memory allocations.
> 
> So, there's spectrum of solutions between merging task counter and
> just directing everyone to kmem without distinguishing task resource
> at all, and at the moment voices in my head are succeeding at making
> cases for both directions.  What do you guys think about the above two
> issues?
> 


To be honest, I doubt that task counter is unnecessary...memcg can catch
oom situation well. I often test 'make -j' under memcg.

To the questions
*   It sounds like a 'ulimit' cgroup. How about overwriting
    ulimit values via cgroup ? (sounds joke?) Then, overhead will be small but
    I'm not sure it can be hierarchical and doesn't break userland.

    If people wants to limit the number of tasks, I think interface should provide it
    in the unit of objects. Then, I'm ok to have other subsystem for counting something.
    fork-bomb's memory overhead can be prevent by memcg. What memcg cannot handle
    is ulimit. If forkbomb exhausts all ulimit/tasks, the user cannot login.
    So, having task-limit cgroup subsys for a sandbox will make sense in some situation.

In short, I don't think it's better to have task-counting and fd-counting in memcg.
It's kmem, but it's more than that, I think.
Please provide subsys like ulimit.

Thanks,
-Kame


  parent reply	other threads:[~2012-04-13  1:44 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 44+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2012-04-11 18:57 [RFD] Merge task counter into memcg Frederic Weisbecker
2012-04-11 19:21 ` Glauber Costa
2012-04-12 11:19   ` Frederic Weisbecker
2012-04-12  0:56 ` KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki
2012-04-12 11:32   ` Frederic Weisbecker
2012-04-12 11:43     ` Glauber Costa
2012-04-12 12:32       ` Johannes Weiner
2012-04-12 13:12         ` Glauber Costa
2012-04-12 15:30           ` Johannes Weiner
2012-04-12 16:38             ` Tejun Heo
2012-04-12 17:04               ` Cgroup in a single hierarchy (Was: Re: [RFD] Merge task counter into memcg) Glauber Costa
2012-04-17 15:13                 ` Tejun Heo
2012-04-17 15:27                   ` Glauber Costa
2012-04-12 17:13               ` [RFD] Merge task counter into memcg Glauber Costa
2012-04-12 17:23               ` Johannes Weiner
2012-04-12 17:41                 ` Tejun Heo
2012-04-12 17:53                   ` Glauber Costa
2012-04-13  1:42                   ` KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki [this message]
2012-04-13  1:50                     ` Glauber Costa
2012-04-13  2:48                       ` KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki
2012-04-17 15:41                     ` Tejun Heo
2012-04-17 16:52                       ` Glauber Costa
2012-04-18  6:51                         ` KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki
2012-04-18  7:53                           ` Frederic Weisbecker
2012-04-18  8:42                             ` KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki
2012-04-18  9:12                               ` Frederic Weisbecker
2012-04-18 10:39                               ` Johannes Weiner
2012-04-18 11:00                                 ` KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki
2012-04-12 16:54             ` Glauber Costa
2012-04-12  1:07 ` Johannes Weiner
2012-04-12  2:15   ` Glauber Costa
2012-04-12  3:26   ` Li Zefan
2012-04-12 14:55   ` Frederic Weisbecker
2012-04-12 16:34     ` Glauber Costa
2012-04-12 16:59       ` Frederic Weisbecker
2012-04-17 15:17         ` Tejun Heo
2012-04-18  6:54           ` Frederic Weisbecker
2012-04-18  8:10             ` Frederic Weisbecker
2012-04-18 12:00               ` Glauber Costa
2012-04-12  4:00 ` Alexander Nikiforov
     [not found] ` <4F86527C.2080507@samsung.com>
2012-04-17  1:09   ` Frederic Weisbecker
2012-04-17  6:45     ` Alexander Nikiforov
2012-04-17 15:23       ` Tejun Heo
2012-04-19  3:34         ` Alexander Nikiforov

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=4F878480.60505@jp.fujitsu.com \
    --to=kamezawa.hiroyu@jp.fujitsu.com \
    --cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
    --cc=berrange@redhat.com \
    --cc=cgroups@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=containers@lists.linux-foundation.org \
    --cc=dwalsh@redhat.com \
    --cc=fweisbec@gmail.com \
    --cc=glommer@parallels.com \
    --cc=hannes@cmpxchg.org \
    --cc=hughd@google.com \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=lizf@cn.fujitsu.com \
    --cc=tj@kernel.org \
    /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