Re: [RFC][PATCH] memcg soft limit (yet another new design) v1

[KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki]

On Tue, 31 Mar 2009 11:40:10 +0530
Balbir Singh <balbir@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

> > > Swapout for A? For A it is expected, but for B it is not. How many
> > > nodes do you have on your machine? Any fake numa nodes?
> > > 
> > Of course, from B.
> >
> 
> I asked because I see A have a swapout of 350 MB, which is expected
> since it is way over its soft limit.
>  
gcc doesn't use so much RSS..ld ?

> > Nothing special boot options. My test was on VMware 2cpus/1.6GB memory.
> > 
> > I wonder why swapout can be 0 on your test. Do you add some extra hooks to
> > kswapd ?
> >
> 
> Nope.. no special hooks to kswapd. B never enters the RB-Tree and thus
> never hits the memcg soft limit reclaim path. kswapd can reclaim from
> it, but it grows back quickly.
Why grows back ? tasks in B sleeps ?

>  At some point, memcg soft limit reclaim
> hits A and reclaims memory from it, allowing B to run without any
> problems. I am talking about the state at the end of the experiment.
> 
Considering LRU rotation (ACTIVE->INACTIVE), pages in group B never goes back
to ACTIVE list and can be the first candidates for swap-out via kswapd.

Hmm....kswapd doesn't work at all ?

(or 1700MB was too much.)

Thanks,
-Kame


--
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/