[lkml]   [2013]   [Jan]   [9]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
SubjectRe: [PATCH 1/2] Add mempressure cgroup
On Wed, Jan 09, 2013 at 12:37:31PM -0800, Tejun Heo wrote:
> Hello,
> Can you please cc me too when posting further patches? I kinda missed
> the whole discussion upto this point.
> On Fri, Jan 04, 2013 at 12:29:11AM -0800, Anton Vorontsov wrote:
> > This commit implements David Rientjes' idea of mempressure cgroup.
> >
> > The main characteristics are the same to what I've tried to add to vmevent
> > API; internally, it uses Mel Gorman's idea of scanned/reclaimed ratio for
> > pressure index calculation. But we don't expose the index to the userland.
> > Instead, there are three levels of the pressure:
> >
> > o low (just reclaiming, e.g. caches are draining);
> > o medium (allocation cost becomes high, e.g. swapping);
> > o oom (about to oom very soon).
> >
> > The rationale behind exposing levels and not the raw pressure index
> > described here:
> >
> > For a task it is possible to be in both cpusets, memcg and mempressure
> > cgroups, so by rearranging the tasks it is possible to watch a specific
> > pressure (i.e. caused by cpuset and/or memcg).
> So, cgroup is headed towards single hierarchy. Dunno how much it
> would affect mempressure but it probably isn't wise to design with
> focus on multiple hierarchies.

Also, how are you implementing hierarchical behavior? All controllers
should support hierarchy. Can you please explain how the interface
would work in detail?



 \ /
  Last update: 2013-01-09 23:01    [W:1.450 / U:0.404 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site