Re: [PATCH -V2 0/9] memcg: add HugeTLB resource tracking
From: David Gibson <hidden>
Date: 2012-03-06 03:06:57
Also in:
linux-mm, lkml
On Sun, Mar 04, 2012 at 11:39:23PM +0530, Aneesh Kumar K.V wrote:
On Fri, 2 Mar 2012 14:28:53 +1100, David Gibson [off-list ref] wrote:quoted
On Thu, Mar 01, 2012 at 02:40:29PM -0800, Andrew Morton wrote:quoted
On Thu, 1 Mar 2012 14:46:11 +0530 "Aneesh Kumar K.V" [off-list ref] wrote:quoted
This patchset implements a memory controller extension to control HugeTLB allocations. It is similar to the existing hugetlb quota support in that, the limit is enforced at mmap(2) time and not at fault time. HugeTLB's quota mechanism limits the number of huge pages that can allocated per superblock. For shared mappings we track the regions mapped by a task along with the memcg. We keep the memory controller charged even after the task that did mmap(2) exits. Uncharge happens during truncate. For Private mappings we charge and uncharge from the current task cgroup.I haven't begin to get my head around this yet, but I'd like to draw your attention to https://lkml.org/lkml/2012/2/15/548. That fix has been hanging around for a while, but I haven't done anything with it yet because I don't like its additional blurring of the separation between hugetlb core code and hugetlbfs. I want to find time to sit down and see if the fix can be better architected but haven't got around to that yet.So.. that version of the fix I specifically rebuilt to address your concerns about that blurring - in fact I think it reduces the current layer blurring. I haven't had any reply - what problems do see it as still having?https://lkml.org/lkml/2012/2/16/179 ?
Ah. Missed that reply somehow. Odd. Replied now and I'll respin accordingly.
That is a serious issue isn't it ?
Yes, it is. And it's been around for a long, long time. -- David Gibson | I'll have my music baroque, and my code david AT gibson.dropbear.id.au | minimalist, thank you. NOT _the_ _other_ | _way_ _around_! http://www.ozlabs.org/~dgibson