Re: [patch 0/7] cpuset writeback throttling

[Andrew Morton]

On Tue, 04 Nov 2008 21:53:08 +0100
Peter Zijlstra <peterz@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

> On Tue, 2008-11-04 at 12:47 -0800, Andrew Morton wrote:
> > On Thu, 30 Oct 2008 12:23:10 -0700 (PDT)
> > David Rientjes <rientjes@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> > 
> > > This is the revised cpuset writeback throttling patchset
> > 
> > I'm all confused about why this is a cpuset thing rather than a cgroups
> > thing.  What are the relationships here?
> > 
> > I mean, writeback throttling _should_ operate upon a control group
> > (more specifically: a memcg), yes?  I guess you're assuming a 1:1
> > relationship here?
> 
> I think the main reason is that we have per-node vmstats so the cpuset
> extention is relatively easy. Whereas we do not currently maintain
> vmstats on a cgroup level - although I imagine that could be remedied.

It didn't look easy to me - it added a lot more code in places which are
already wicked complex.

I'm trying to understand where this is all coming from and what fits
into where.  Fiddling with a cpuset's mems_allowed for purposes of
memory partitioning is all nasty 2007 technology, isn't it?  Does a raw
cpuset-based control such as this have a future?


--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/