On Sun, Sep 18, 2011 at 12:39:12AM -0300, Glauber Costa wrote:

quoted

No kernel memory accounting for root cgroup, right?

Not sure. Maybe kernel memory accounting is useful even for root cgroup. 
Same as normal memory accounting... what we want to avoid is kernel 
memory limits. OTOH, if we are not limiting it anyway, accounting it is 
just useless overhead... Even the statistics can then be gathered 
through all
the proc files that show slab usage, I guess?

It's better to leave root cgroup without accounting. At least for now.
We can add it later if needed.

quoted

quoted

@@ -3979,6 +3999,10 @@ static u64 mem_cgroup_read(struct cgroup *cont, struct cftype *cft)
  		else
  			val = res_counter_read_u64(&mem->memsw, name);
  		break;
+	case _KMEM:
+		val = res_counter_read_u64(&mem->kmem, name);
+		break;
+

Always zero in root cgroup?

Yes, if we're not accounting, it should be zero. WARN_ON, maybe?

-ENOSYS?

-- 
 Kirill A. Shutemov

--
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/ .
Fight unfair telecom internet charges in Canada: sign http://stopthemeter.ca/
Don't email: <a href=mailto:"dont@kvack.org"> email@kvack.org </a>