Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1030181AbWHQRDs (ORCPT ); Thu, 17 Aug 2006 13:03:48 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S965130AbWHQRDs (ORCPT ); Thu, 17 Aug 2006 13:03:48 -0400 Received: from smtp-out.google.com ([216.239.45.12]:7833 "EHLO smtp-out.google.com") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S965056AbWHQRDr (ORCPT ); Thu, 17 Aug 2006 13:03:47 -0400 DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; s=beta; d=google.com; c=nofws; q=dns; h=received:subject:from:reply-to:to:cc:in-reply-to:references: content-type:organization:date:message-id:mime-version:x-mailer:content-transfer-encoding; b=nPZtFW0BKMjilRGj5Fmwy/SmyxWvQAq4ujpPuGr10lMbtqHKW0c/GzkpHccjfKKO9 Ack6uZNusoHWu2e3sbDvw== Subject: Re: [RFC][PATCH 5/7] UBC: kernel memory accounting (core) From: Rohit Seth Reply-To: rohitseth@google.com To: Kirill Korotaev Cc: Andrew Morton , Linux Kernel Mailing List , Alan Cox , Ingo Molnar , Christoph Hellwig , Pavel Emelianov , Andrey Savochkin , devel@openvz.org, Rik van Riel , hugh@veritas.com, ckrm-tech@lists.sourceforge.net, Andi Kleen In-Reply-To: <44E46ED3.7000201@sw.ru> References: <44E33893.6020700@sw.ru> <44E33C8A.6030705@sw.ru> <1155752693.22595.76.camel@galaxy.corp.google.com> <44E46ED3.7000201@sw.ru> Content-Type: text/plain Organization: Google Inc Date: Thu, 17 Aug 2006 10:02:16 -0700 Message-Id: <1155834136.14617.29.camel@galaxy.corp.google.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Evolution 2.2.1.1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 1024 Lines: 23 On Thu, 2006-08-17 at 17:27 +0400, Kirill Korotaev wrote: > > If I'm reading this patch right then seems like you are making page > > allocations to fail w/o (for example) trying to purge some pages from > > the page cache belonging to this container. Or is that reclaim going to > > come later? > > charged kernel objects can't be _reclaimed_. how do you propose > to reclaim tasks page tables or files or task struct or vma or etc.? I agree that kernel objects cann't be reclaimed easily. But what you are proposing is also not right. Returning failure w/o doing any reclaim on pages (that are reclaimable) is not useful. And this is why I asked, is this change going to be part of next set of patches (as current set of patches are only tracking kernel usage). -rohit - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/