From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([208.118.235.92]:53099)
	by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71)
	(envelope-from <mst@redhat.com>) id 1UPeqb-0002iw-Pu
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Tue, 09 Apr 2013 16:08:57 -0400
Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71)
	(envelope-from <mst@redhat.com>) id 1UPeqZ-0003O0-Dk
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Tue, 09 Apr 2013 16:08:53 -0400
Received: from mx1.redhat.com ([209.132.183.28]:24076)
	by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71)
	(envelope-from <mst@redhat.com>) id 1UPeqZ-0003Nm-4N
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Tue, 09 Apr 2013 16:08:51 -0400
Date: Tue, 9 Apr 2013 22:09:44 +0300
From: "Michael S. Tsirkin" <mst@redhat.com>
Message-ID: <20130409190943.GC8212@redhat.com>
References: <20130324155153.GA8597@redhat.com>
	<515F3160.4020007@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
	<CAL1RGDU2jtrRrxi6srsH_ADiYGvJbCpCT3UvoLGTX3cvQ=s0kQ@mail.gmail.com>
	<515F3948.40205@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
	<CAG4TOxPNHZadLjq6-HuOExf1XXLO6AYyvRQ1L09i6qVeA5dbLQ@mail.gmail.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <CAG4TOxPNHZadLjq6-HuOExf1XXLO6AYyvRQ1L09i6qVeA5dbLQ@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCHv2] rdma: add a new IB_ACCESS_GIFT flag
List-Id: <qemu-devel.nongnu.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/options/qemu-devel>,
	<mailto:qemu-devel-request@nongnu.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.nongnu.org/archive/html/qemu-devel>
List-Post: <mailto:qemu-devel@nongnu.org>
List-Help: <mailto:qemu-devel-request@nongnu.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/qemu-devel>,
	<mailto:qemu-devel-request@nongnu.org?subject=subscribe>
To: Roland Dreier <roland@kernel.org>
Cc: qemu-devel@nongnu.org, "linux-rdma@vger.kernel.org" <linux-rdma@vger.kernel.org>, Yishai Hadas <yishaih@mellanox.com>, LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>, "Michael R. Hines" <mrhines@linux.vnet.ibm.com>, Hal Rosenstock <hal.rosenstock@gmail.com>, Jason Gunthorpe <jgunthorpe@obsidianresearch.com>, Sean Hefty <sean.hefty@intel.com>, Christoph Lameter <cl@linux.com>

On Fri, Apr 05, 2013 at 02:03:33PM -0700, Roland Dreier wrote:
> On Fri, Apr 5, 2013 at 1:51 PM, Michael R. Hines
> <mrhines@linux.vnet.ibm.com> wrote:
> > Sorry, I was wrong. ignore the comments about cgroups. That's still broken.
> > (i.e. trying to register RDMA memory while using a cgroup swap limit cause
> > the process get killed).
> >
> > But the GIFT flag patch works (my understanding is that GIFT flag allows the
> > adapter to transmit stale memory information, it does not have anything to
> > do with cgroups specifically).
> 
> The point of the GIFT patch is to avoid triggering copy-on-write so
> that memory doesn't blow up during migration.  If that doesn't work
> then there's no point to the patch.
> 
>  - R.

Absolutely. Checking whether an OOM gets triggered looks like a heavy
handed approach to testing the feature though.
It's relevant, but there could be many other reasons for it to trigger.
See Documentation/cgroups/memory.txt section "Troubleshooting".

It's easier to just check whether this patch reduces the memory consumption,
that's the point really.

-- 
MST