lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2012]   [Mar]   [12]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: [PATCH v2 02/13] memcg: Kernel memory accounting infrastructure.
On 03/10/2012 12:39 AM, Suleiman Souhlal wrote:
> +#ifdef CONFIG_CGROUP_MEM_RES_CTLR_KMEM
> +int
> +memcg_charge_kmem(struct mem_cgroup *memcg, gfp_t gfp, long long delta)
> +{
> + struct res_counter *fail_res;
> + struct mem_cgroup *_memcg;
> + int may_oom, ret;
> +
> + may_oom = (gfp& __GFP_WAIT)&& (gfp& __GFP_FS)&&
> + !(gfp& __GFP_NORETRY);
> +
> + ret = 0;
> +
> + _memcg = memcg;
> + if (memcg&& !mem_cgroup_test_flag(memcg,
> + MEMCG_INDEPENDENT_KMEM_LIMIT)) {
> + ret = __mem_cgroup_try_charge(NULL, gfp, delta / PAGE_SIZE,
> + &_memcg, may_oom);
> + if (ret == -ENOMEM)
> + return ret;
> + }
> +
> + if (memcg&& _memcg == memcg)
> + ret = res_counter_charge(&memcg->kmem, delta,&fail_res);
> +
> + return ret;
> +}
> +
> +void
Ok.

So I've spent most of the day today trying to come up with a way not to
kill the whole performance we gain from consume_stock() by this
res_counter_charge() to kmem afterwards...

You mentioned you want to still be able to bill to memcg->kmem mostly
for debugging/display purposes. So we're surely not using all of the
res_counter infrastructure (limiting, soft limits, etc)

I was thinking: Can't we have a percpu_counter that we use for this
purpose when !kmem_independent ?

we may not even need to bloat the struct, since we can fold it into a
union with struct res_counter kmem (which is bigger than a percpu
counter anyway).

We just need to be a bit more careful not to allow kmem_independent to
change when we already have charges to any of them (but we need to do it
anyway)




\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2012-03-12 13:43    [W:0.437 / U:0.592 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site