2012-10-01 08:32:05

by Glauber Costa

[permalink] [raw]
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 06/13] memcg: kmem controller infrastructure

On 09/30/2012 12:25 PM, Tejun Heo wrote:
> On Fri, Sep 28, 2012 at 03:34:19PM +0400, Glauber Costa wrote:
>> On 09/27/2012 05:44 PM, Michal Hocko wrote:
>>> Anyway, I have just noticed that __mem_cgroup_try_charge does
>>> VM_BUG_ON(css_is_removed(&memcg->css)) on a given memcg so you should
>>> keep css ref count up as well.
>>
>> IIRC, css_get will prevent the cgroup directory from being removed.
>> Because some allocations are expected to outlive the cgroup, we
>> specifically don't want that.
>
> That synchronous ref draining is going away. Maybe we can do that
> before kmemcg? Michal, do you have some timeframe on mind?
>

Since you said yourself in other points in this thread that you are fine
with some page references outliving the cgroup in the case of slab, this
is a situation that comes with the code, not a situation that was
incidentally there, and we're making use of.


2012-10-03 22:12:04

by Tejun Heo

[permalink] [raw]
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 06/13] memcg: kmem controller infrastructure

Hello, Glauber.

Sorry about late replies. I'be been traveling for the Korean
thanksgiving holidays.

On Mon, Oct 01, 2012 at 12:28:28PM +0400, Glauber Costa wrote:
> > That synchronous ref draining is going away. Maybe we can do that
> > before kmemcg? Michal, do you have some timeframe on mind?
>
> Since you said yourself in other points in this thread that you are fine
> with some page references outliving the cgroup in the case of slab, this
> is a situation that comes with the code, not a situation that was
> incidentally there, and we're making use of.

Hmmm? Not sure what you're trying to say but I wanted to say that
this should be okay once the scheduled memcg pre_destroy change
happens and nudge Michal once more.

Thanks.

--
tejun