Messages in this thread | | | Date | Fri, 04 Apr 2008 01:57:14 +0530 | From | Balbir Singh <> | Subject | Re: cgroup_disable=memory for 2.6.25? |
| |
Hugh Dickins wrote: > Hi Balbir, > > I'm rather surprised that nobody has pushed -mm's > > cgroups-add-cgroup-support-for-enabling-controllers-at-boot-time.patch > cgroups-add-cgroup-support-for-enabling-controllers-at-boot-time-fix-boot-option-parsing.patch > memory-controller-make-memory-resource-control-aware-of-boot-options.patch > > into 2.6.25: which was what I'd expected when I first suggested that > distros might want a way to build with the potential for mem cgroups, > but be able to switch off their significant overhead for everyone not > interested. > > Ballpark figures, I'm trying to get this question out rather than > processing the exact numbers: CONFIG_CGROUP_MEM_RES_CTLR adds 15% > overhead to the affected paths, booting with cgroup_disable=memory > cuts that back to 1% overhead (due to slightly bigger struct page). > > I'm no expert on distros, they may have no interest whatever in > CONFIG_CGROUP_MEM_RES_CTLR=y; and the rest of us can easily build > with or without it, or apply the cgroup_disable=memory patches. > > But if those patches serve a purpose, shouldn't they be in 2.6.25?
Hi, Hugh,
I expected those patches to make it into 2.6.25. But ever since 2.6.25-rc5-mm1, the next -mm was for 2.6.25-rc8. I have been meaning to follow up with Andrew, but lost with some other patches.
Andrew,
Could we please push these patches upstream before 2.6.25? Or is it too late?
-- Warm Regards, Balbir Singh Linux Technology Center IBM, ISTL
| |