Re: [PATCH v4 23/25] memcg: propagate kmem limiting information tochildren

[Glauber Costa]

On 06/18/2012 04:37 PM, Kamezawa Hiroyuki wrote:
> (2012/06/18 19:28), Glauber Costa wrote:
>> The current memcg slab cache management fails to present satisfatory hierarchical
>> behavior in the following scenario:
>>
>> ->  /cgroups/memory/A/B/C
>>
>> * kmem limit set at A
>> * A and B empty taskwise
>> * bash in C does find /
>>
>> Because kmem_accounted is a boolean that was not set for C, no accounting
>> would be done. This is, however, not what we expect.
>>
> 
> Hmm....do we need this new routines even while we have mem_cgroup_iter() ?
> 
> Doesn't this work ?
> 
> 	struct mem_cgroup {
> 		.....
> 		bool kmem_accounted_this;
> 		atomic_t kmem_accounted;
> 		....
> 	}
> 
> at set limit
> 
> 	....set_limit(memcg) {
> 
> 		if (newly accounted) {
> 			mem_cgroup_iter() {
> 				atomic_inc(&iter->kmem_accounted)
> 			}
> 		} else {
> 			mem_cgroup_iter() {
> 				atomic_dec(&iter->kmem_accounted);
> 			}
> 	}
> 
> 
> hm ? Then, you can see kmem is accounted or not by atomic_read(&memcg->kmem_accounted);
> 

Accounted by itself / parent is still useful, and I see no reason to use
an atomic + bool if we can use a pair of bits.

As for the routine, I guess mem_cgroup_iter will work... It does a lot
more than I need, but for the sake of using what's already in there, I
can switch to it with no problems.



--
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/