Re: [PATCH v2 04/11] kmem accounting basic infrastructure
From: Christoph Lameter <hidden>
Date: 2012-08-15 15:44:13
Also in:
linux-mm, lkml
On Wed, 15 Aug 2012, Glauber Costa wrote:
On 08/15/2012 06:47 PM, Christoph Lameter wrote:quoted
On Wed, 15 Aug 2012, Michal Hocko wrote:quoted
quoted
That is not what the kernel does, in general. We assume that if he wants that memory and we can serve it, we should. Also, not all kernel memory is unreclaimable. We can shrink the slabs, for instance. Ying Han claims she has patches for that already...Are those patches somewhere around?You can already shrink the reclaimable slabs (dentries / inodes) via calls to the subsystem specific shrinkers. Did Ying Han do anything to go beyond that?That is not enough for us. We would like to make sure that the objects being discarded belong to the memcg which is under pressure. We don't need to be perfect here, and an occasional slip is totally fine. But if in general, shrinking from memcg A will mostly wipe out objects from memcg B, we harmed the system in return for nothing good.
How can you figure out which objects belong to which memcg? The ownerships of dentries and inodes is a dubious concept already. -- To unsubscribe, send a message with 'unsubscribe linux-mm' in the body to majordomo@kvack.org. For more info on Linux MM, see: http://www.linux-mm.org/ . Don't email: <a href=mailto:"dont@kvack.org"> email@kvack.org </a>