Re: [RFC][0/3] Virtual address space control for cgroups

[Balbir Singh]

Paul Menage wrote:
> On Mon, Mar 17, 2008 at 9:50 AM, Balbir Singh <balbir@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>>  I am yet to measure the performance overhead of the accounting checks. I'll try
>>  and get started on that today. I did not consider making it a separate system,
>>  because I suspect that anybody wanting memory control would also want address
>>  space control (for the advantages listed in the documentation).
> 
> I'm a counter-example to your suspicion :-)
> 
> Trying to control virtual address space is a complete nightmare in the
> presence of anything that uses large sparsely-populated mappings
> (mmaps of large files, or large sparse heaps such as the JVM uses.)
> 

Not really. Virtual limits are more gentle than an OOM kill that can occur if
the cgroup runs out of memory. Please also see
http://linux-vserver.org/Memory_Limits

> If we want to control the effect of swapping, the right way to do it
> is to control disk I/O, and ensure that the swapping is accounted to
> that. Or simply just not give apps much swap space.

Yes, a disk I/O and swap I/O controller are being developed (not by us, but
others in the community). How does one restrict swap space for a particular
application? I can think of RLIMIT_AS for a process and something similar to
what I've posted for cgroups. Not enabling swap is an option, but not very
practical IMHO.

-- 
	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@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/