Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1750837AbXBSKZ1 (ORCPT ); Mon, 19 Feb 2007 05:25:27 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1750849AbXBSKZ1 (ORCPT ); Mon, 19 Feb 2007 05:25:27 -0500 Received: from ausmtp05.au.ibm.com ([202.81.18.154]:37141 "EHLO ausmtp05.au.ibm.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1750841AbXBSKZY (ORCPT ); Mon, 19 Feb 2007 05:25:24 -0500 Message-ID: <45D97AC7.2000903@in.ibm.com> Date: Mon, 19 Feb 2007 15:54:07 +0530 From: Balbir Singh Reply-To: balbir@in.ibm.com Organization: IBM User-Agent: Thunderbird 1.5.0.9 (X11/20070103) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Kirill Korotaev CC: Paul Menage , Andrew Morton , vatsa@in.ibm.com, ckrm-tech@lists.sourceforge.net, xemul@sw.ru, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-mm@kvack.org, svaidy@linux.vnet.ibm.com, devel@openvz.org Subject: Re: [ckrm-tech] [RFC][PATCH][0/4] Memory controller (RSS Control) References: <20070219065019.3626.33947.sendpatchset@balbir-laptop> <20070219005441.7fa0eccc.akpm@linux-foundation.org> <6599ad830702190106m3f391de4x170326fef2e4872@mail.gmail.com> <45D972CC.2010702@sw.ru> In-Reply-To: <45D972CC.2010702@sw.ru> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 1361 Lines: 34 Kirill Korotaev wrote: >> On 2/19/07, Andrew Morton wrote: >> >>> Alas, I fear this might have quite bad worst-case behaviour. One small >>> container which is under constant memory pressure will churn the >>> system-wide LRUs like mad, and will consume rather a lot of system time. >>> So it's a point at which container A can deleteriously affect things which >>> are running in other containers, which is exactly what we're supposed to >>> not do. >> >> I think it's OK for a container to consume lots of system time during >> reclaim, as long as we can account that time to the container involved >> (i.e. if it's done during direct reclaim rather than by something like >> kswapd). > hmm, is it ok to scan 100Gb of RAM for 10MB RAM container? > in UBC patch set we used page beancounters to track containter pages. > This allows to make efficient scan contoler and reclamation. > > Thanks, > Kirill Hi, Kirill, Yes, that's a problem, but I think it's a problem that can be solved in steps. First step, add reclaim. Second step, optimize reclaim. -- Warm Regards, Balbir Singh - 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/