Thread (127 messages) flat view 127 messages, 9 authors, 2012-10-08

Re: [PATCH v3 04/13] kmem accounting basic infrastructure

From: Glauber Costa <hidden>
Date: 2012-10-04 11:58:53
Also in: linux-mm, lkml

On 10/04/2012 02:54 AM, Tejun Heo wrote:
Hello, Glauber.

On Mon, Oct 01, 2012 at 12:45:11PM +0400, Glauber Costa wrote:
quoted
quoted
where kmemcg_slab_idx is updated from sched notifier (or maybe add and
use current->kmemcg_slab_idx?).  You would still need __GFP_* and
in_interrupt() tests but current->mm and PF_KTHREAD tests can be
rolled into index selection.
How big would this array be? there can be a lot more kmem_caches than
there are memcgs. That is why it is done from memcg side.
The total number of memcgs are pretty limited due to the ID thing,
right?  And kmemcg is only applied to subset of caches.  I don't think
the array size would be a problem in terms of memory overhead, would
it?  If so, RCU synchronize and dynamically grow them?

Thanks.
I don't want to assume the number of memcgs will always be that limited.
Sure, the ID limitation sounds pretty much a big one, but people doing
VMs usually want to stack as many VMs as they possibly can in an
environment, and the less things preventing that from happening, the better.

That said, now that I've experimented with this a bit, indexing from the
cache may have some advantages: it can get too complicated to propagate
new caches appearing to all memcgs that already in-flight. We don't have
this problem from the cache side, because instances of it are guaranteed
not to exist at this point by definition.

I don't want to bloat unrelated kmem_cache structures, so I can't embed
a memcg array in there: I would have to have a pointer to a memcg array
that gets assigned at first use. But if we don't want to have a static
number, as you and christoph already frowned upon heavily, we may have
to do that memcg side as well.

The array gets bigger, though, because it pretty much has to be enough
to accomodate all css_ids. Even now, they are more than the 400 I used
in this patchset. Not allocating all of them at once will lead to more
complication and pointer chasing in here.

I'll take a look at the alternatives today and tomorrow.

--
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>
Keyboard shortcuts
hback out one level
jnext message in thread
kprevious message in thread
ldrill in
Escclose help / fold thread tree
?toggle this help