Re: [PATCH v3 04/13] kmem accounting basic infrastructure
From: Tejun Heo <hidden>
Date: 2012-09-26 16:36:55
Also in:
linux-mm, lkml
From: Tejun Heo <hidden>
Date: 2012-09-26 16:36:55
Also in:
linux-mm, lkml
Hello, Michal, Glauber. On Wed, Sep 26, 2012 at 04:03:47PM +0200, Michal Hocko wrote:
Haven't we already discussed that a new memcg should inherit kmem_accounted
from its parent for use_hierarchy?
Say we have
root
|
A (kmem_accounted = 1, use_hierachy = 1)
\
B (kmem_accounted = 0)
\
C (kmem_accounted = 1)
B find's itself in an awkward situation becuase it doesn't want to
account u+k but it ends up doing so becuase C.Do we really want this level of flexibility? What's wrong with a global switch at the root? I'm not even sure we want this to be optional at all. The only reason I can think of is that it might screw up some configurations in use which are carefully crafted to suit userland-only usage but for that isn't what we need a transition plan rather than another ultra flexible config option that not many really understand the implication of? In the same vein, do we really need both .kmem_accounted and config option? If someone is turning on MEMCG, just include kmem accounting. Thanks. -- tejun