On Mon 22-09-14 11:50:49, Johannes Weiner wrote:

On Mon, Sep 22, 2014 at 04:44:36PM +0200, Michal Hocko wrote:

quoted

On Fri 19-09-14 09:22:08, Johannes Weiner wrote:

[...]

quoted

Nevertheless I think that the counter should live outside of memcg (it
is ugly and bad in general to make HUGETLB controller depend on MEMCG
just to have a counter). If you made kernel/page_counter.c and led both
containers select CONFIG_PAGE_COUNTER then you do not need a dependency
on MEMCG and I would find it cleaner in general.

The reason I did it this way is because the hugetlb controller simply
accounts and limits a certain type of memory and in the future I would
like to make it a memcg extension, just like kmem and swap.

I am not sure this is the right way to go. Hugetlb has always been
"special" and I do not see any advantage to pull its specialness into
memcg proper. It would just make the code more complicated. I can also
imagine users who simply do not want to pay memcg overhead and use only
hugetlb controller.

Besides that it is not like a separate page_counter with a clear
interface would cause more maintenance overhead so I really do not see
any reason to pull it into memcg.
-- 
Michal Hocko
SUSE Labs

--
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>