Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1754951AbYCQOlX (ORCPT ); Mon, 17 Mar 2008 10:41:23 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1752765AbYCQOlP (ORCPT ); Mon, 17 Mar 2008 10:41:15 -0400 Received: from e28smtp02.in.ibm.com ([59.145.155.2]:50087 "EHLO e28smtp02.in.ibm.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1752854AbYCQOlP (ORCPT ); Mon, 17 Mar 2008 10:41:15 -0400 Message-ID: <47DE82A6.3050604@linux.vnet.ibm.com> Date: Mon, 17 Mar 2008 20:09:34 +0530 From: Balbir Singh Reply-To: balbir@linux.vnet.ibm.com Organization: IBM User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.12 (X11/20080226) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Pavel Emelyanov CC: linux-mm@kvack.org, Hugh Dickins , Sudhir Kumar , YAMAMOTO Takashi , Paul Menage , lizf@cn.fujitsu.com, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, taka@valinux.co.jp, David Rientjes , Andrew Morton , KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki Subject: Re: [RFC][2/3] Account and control virtual address space allocations References: <20080316172942.8812.56051.sendpatchset@localhost.localdomain> <20080316173005.8812.88290.sendpatchset@localhost.localdomain> <47DE57C2.5060206@openvz.org> <47DE640F.3070601@linux.vnet.ibm.com> <47DE66BE.30904@openvz.org> <47DE695D.3080605@linux.vnet.ibm.com> <47DE6B8D.5090302@openvz.org> In-Reply-To: <47DE6B8D.5090302@openvz.org> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 2785 Lines: 83 Pavel Emelyanov wrote: > Balbir Singh wrote: >> Pavel Emelyanov wrote: >>> Balbir Singh wrote: >>>> Pavel Emelyanov wrote: >>>>> [snip] >>>>> >>>>>> +int mem_cgroup_update_as(struct mm_struct *mm, long nr_pages) >>>>>> +{ >>>>>> + int ret = 0; >>>>>> + struct mem_cgroup *mem; >>>>>> + if (mem_cgroup_subsys.disabled) >>>>>> + return ret; >>>>>> + >>>>>> + rcu_read_lock(); >>>>>> + mem = rcu_dereference(mm->mem_cgroup); >>>>>> + css_get(&mem->css); >>>>>> + rcu_read_unlock(); >>>>>> + >>>>>> + if (nr_pages > 0) { >>>>>> + if (res_counter_charge(&mem->as_res, (nr_pages * PAGE_SIZE))) >>>>>> + ret = 1; >>>>>> + } else >>>>>> + res_counter_uncharge(&mem->as_res, (-nr_pages * PAGE_SIZE)); >>>>> No, please, no. Let's make two calls - mem_cgroup_charge_as and mem_cgroup_uncharge_as. >>>>> >>>>> [snip] >>>>> >>>> Yes, sure :) >>> Thanks :) >>> >>>>>> @@ -1117,6 +1117,9 @@ munmap_back: >>>>>> } >>>>>> } >>>>>> >>>>>> + if (mem_cgroup_update_as(mm, len >> PAGE_SHIFT)) >>>>>> + return -ENOMEM; >>>>>> + >>>>> Why not use existintg cap_vm_enough_memory and co? >>>>> >>>> I thought about it and almost used may_expand_vm(), but there is a slight catch >>>> there. With cap_vm_enough_memory() or security_vm_enough_memory(), they are >>>> called after total_vm has been calculated. In our case we need to keep the >>>> cgroups equivalent of total_vm up to date, and we do this in mem_cgorup_update_as. >>> So? What prevents us from using these hooks? :) >> 1. We need to account total_vm usage of the task anyway. So why have two places, >> one for accounting and second for control? > > We still have two of them even placing hooks in each place manually. > > Besides, putting the mem_cgroup_(un)charge_as() in these vm hooks will > 1. save the number of places to patch > 2. help keeping memcgroup consistent in case someone adds more places > that expand tasks vm (arches, drivers) - in case we have our hooks > celled from inside vm ones, we won't have to patch more. > I am not sure I understand your proposal. Without manually placing these hooks how do we track 1. When the vm size has increased/decreased 2. In case due to some reason, the call following these hooks fail, how do we undo it, without placing hooks? >> 2. These hooks are activated for conditionally invoked for vma's with VM_ACCOUNT >> set. > > This is a good point against. But, wrt my previous comment, can we handle > this somehow? Not sure I understand -- Warm Regards, Balbir Singh Linux Technology Center IBM, ISTL -- 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/