On Mon, 18 Oct 2010 17:39:39 -0700
Greg Thelen gthe...@google.com wrote:
Add calls into memcg dirty page accounting. Notify memcg when pages
transition between clean, file dirty, writeback, and unstable nfs.
This allows the memory controller to maintain an accurate view of
the amount of its
On Mon, 18 Oct 2010 17:39:35 -0700
Greg Thelen gthe...@google.com wrote:
Document cgroup dirty memory interfaces and statistics.
Signed-off-by: Andrea Righi ari...@develer.com
Signed-off-by: Greg Thelen gthe...@google.com
---
Changelog since v1:
- Renamed nfs/total_nfs to
This patch causes the restart coordinator to clear the object hash
before releasing the restarted tasks. It does this to make sure
that any objects being held exclusively by the hash are released
before the tasks start running again.
If we continue to postpone clearing the object hash until
While running namespace checks to look for dead code,
I found that debug_subsys is declared global but never
used in current code.
This leads to the fact that since debug_subsys is never
used, the whole set of debugging functions is also never
used. Is the whole CGROUP_DEBUG config option dead?
On Tue, Oct 19, 2010 at 07:03:11AM -0700, Dan Smith wrote:
This patch causes the restart coordinator to clear the object hash
before releasing the restarted tasks. It does this to make sure
that any objects being held exclusively by the hash are released
before the tasks start running again.
Daisuke Nishimura nishim...@mxp.nes.nec.co.jp writes:
On Mon, 18 Oct 2010 17:39:35 -0700
Greg Thelen gthe...@google.com wrote:
Document cgroup dirty memory interfaces and statistics.
Signed-off-by: Andrea Righi ari...@develer.com
Signed-off-by: Greg Thelen gthe...@google.com
---
On Tue, 19 Oct 2010 14:00:58 -0700
Greg Thelen gthe...@google.com wrote:
Daisuke Nishimura nishim...@mxp.nes.nec.co.jp writes:
On Mon, 18 Oct 2010 17:39:35 -0700
Greg Thelen gthe...@google.com wrote:
Document cgroup dirty memory interfaces and statistics.
Signed-off-by: Andrea
On Wed, 20 Oct 2010 09:11:09 +0900
KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki kamezawa.hir...@jp.fujitsu.com wrote:
On Tue, 19 Oct 2010 14:00:58 -0700
Greg Thelen gthe...@google.com wrote:
(snip)
+When use_hierarchy=0, each cgroup has independent dirty memory usage and
limits.
+
+When use_hierarchy=1, a
+static unsigned long long
+memcg_hierarchical_free_pages(struct mem_cgroup *mem)
+{
+ struct cgroup *cgroup;
+ unsigned long long min_free, free;
+
+ min_free = res_counter_read_u64(mem-res, RES_LIMIT) -
+ res_counter_read_u64(mem-res, RES_USAGE);
+ cgroup =
On Mon, 18 Oct 2010 17:39:38 -0700
Greg Thelen gthe...@google.com wrote:
Add memcg routines to track dirty, writeback, and unstable_NFS pages.
These routines are not yet used by the kernel to count such pages.
A later change adds kernel calls to these new routines.
Signed-off-by: Greg
Stephen Hemminger wrote:
While running namespace checks to look for dead code,
I found that debug_subsys is declared global but never
used in current code.
This leads to the fact that since debug_subsys is never
used, the whole set of debugging functions is also never
used. Is the whole
On Wed, 20 Oct 2010 09:11:10 +0800
Li Zefan l...@cn.fujitsu.com wrote:
Stephen Hemminger wrote:
While running namespace checks to look for dead code,
I found that debug_subsys is declared global but never
used in current code.
This leads to the fact that since debug_subsys is never
On Tue, Oct 19, 2010 at 6:12 PM, Stephen Hemminger
shemmin...@vyatta.com wrote:
Where is it stored in an array?
~/kernel/linux-2.6$ git grep debug_subsys
kernel/cgroup.c: kfree(cont-subsys[debug_subsys_id]);
kernel/cgroup.c:struct cgroup_subsys debug_subsys = {
kernel/cgroup.c:
On Wed, 20 Oct 2010 09:48:21 +0900
Daisuke Nishimura nishim...@mxp.nes.nec.co.jp wrote:
On Wed, 20 Oct 2010 09:11:09 +0900
KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki kamezawa.hir...@jp.fujitsu.com wrote:
On Tue, 19 Oct 2010 14:00:58 -0700
Greg Thelen gthe...@google.com wrote:
(snip)
+When use_hierarchy=0,
On Tue, 19 Oct 2010 18:14:10 -0700
Paul Menage men...@google.com wrote:
On Tue, Oct 19, 2010 at 6:12 PM, Stephen Hemminger
shemmin...@vyatta.com wrote:
Where is it stored in an array?
~/kernel/linux-2.6$ git grep debug_subsys
kernel/cgroup.c:
On Tue, Oct 19, 2010 at 6:37 PM, Stephen Hemminger
shemmin...@vyatta.com wrote:
That would work but doesn't because the following is missing
in cgroup_subsys.h!
#ifdef CONFIG_CGROUP_DEBUG
SUBSYS(debug)
#endif
/* */
I see that fragment at line 16 in cgroup_subsys.h (see e.g.
Stephen Hemminger wrote:
On Tue, 19 Oct 2010 18:14:10 -0700
Paul Menage men...@google.com wrote:
On Tue, Oct 19, 2010 at 6:12 PM, Stephen Hemminger
shemmin...@vyatta.com wrote:
Where is it stored in an array?
~/kernel/linux-2.6$ git grep debug_subsys
kernel/cgroup.c:
On Wed, 20 Oct 2010 09:43:06 +0800
Li Zefan l...@cn.fujitsu.com wrote:
Stephen Hemminger wrote:
On Tue, 19 Oct 2010 18:14:10 -0700
Paul Menage men...@google.com wrote:
On Tue, Oct 19, 2010 at 6:12 PM, Stephen Hemminger
shemmin...@vyatta.com wrote:
Where is it stored in an array?
Stephen Hemminger wrote:
On Wed, 20 Oct 2010 09:43:06 +0800
Li Zefan l...@cn.fujitsu.com wrote:
Stephen Hemminger wrote:
On Tue, 19 Oct 2010 18:14:10 -0700
Paul Menage men...@google.com wrote:
On Tue, Oct 19, 2010 at 6:12 PM, Stephen Hemminger
shemmin...@vyatta.com wrote:
Where is it
On Wed, 20 Oct 2010 10:14:21 +0900
KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki kamezawa.hir...@jp.fujitsu.com wrote:
On Wed, 20 Oct 2010 09:48:21 +0900
Daisuke Nishimura nishim...@mxp.nes.nec.co.jp wrote:
On Wed, 20 Oct 2010 09:11:09 +0900
KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki kamezawa.hir...@jp.fujitsu.com wrote:
On Tue, 19
One bug fix here.
==
From: KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki kamezawa.hir...@jp.fujitsu.com
Now, at calculating dirty limit, vm_dirty_param() is called.
This function returns dirty-limit related parameters considering
memory cgroup settings.
Now, assume that vm_dirty_bytes=100M (global dirty limit) and
memory
On Mon, 18 Oct 2010 17:39:42 -0700
Greg Thelen gthe...@google.com wrote:
Add cgroupfs interface to memcg dirty page limits:
Direct write-out is controlled with:
- memory.dirty_ratio
- memory.dirty_limit_in_bytes
Background write-out is controlled with:
-
On Wed, 20 Oct 2010 12:31:10 +0900
Daisuke Nishimura nishim...@mxp.nes.nec.co.jp wrote:
On Mon, 18 Oct 2010 17:39:42 -0700
Greg Thelen gthe...@google.com wrote:
Add cgroupfs interface to memcg dirty page limits:
Direct write-out is controlled with:
- memory.dirty_ratio
-
On Wed, 20 Oct 2010 11:24:31 +0900
KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki kamezawa.hir...@jp.fujitsu.com wrote:
On Wed, 20 Oct 2010 10:14:21 +0900
KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki kamezawa.hir...@jp.fujitsu.com wrote:
On Wed, 20 Oct 2010 09:48:21 +0900
Daisuke Nishimura nishim...@mxp.nes.nec.co.jp wrote:
On Wed, 20
On Mon, 18 Oct 2010 17:39:43 -0700
Greg Thelen gthe...@google.com wrote:
The determine_dirtyable_memory() function is not used outside of
page writeback. Make the routine static. No functional change.
Just a cleanup in preparation for a change that adds memcg dirty
limits consideration into
On Wed, 20 Oct 2010 12:31:10 +0900
Daisuke Nishimura nishim...@mxp.nes.nec.co.jp wrote:
On Mon, 18 Oct 2010 17:39:42 -0700
Greg Thelen gthe...@google.com wrote:
Add cgroupfs interface to memcg dirty page limits:
Direct write-out is controlled with:
- memory.dirty_ratio
-
On Mon, 18 Oct 2010 17:39:41 -0700
Greg Thelen gthe...@google.com wrote:
From: Balbir Singh bal...@linux.vnet.ibm.com
memcg has lockdep warnings (sleep inside rcu lock)
From: Balbir Singh bal...@linux.vnet.ibm.com
Recent move to get_online_cpus() ends up calling get_online_cpus() from
KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki kamezawa.hir...@jp.fujitsu.com writes:
On Tue, 19 Oct 2010 14:00:58 -0700
Greg Thelen gthe...@google.com wrote:
Daisuke Nishimura nishim...@mxp.nes.nec.co.jp writes:
On Mon, 18 Oct 2010 17:39:35 -0700
Greg Thelen gthe...@google.com wrote:
Document cgroup dirty
Daisuke Nishimura nishim...@mxp.nes.nec.co.jp writes:
+static unsigned long long
+memcg_hierarchical_free_pages(struct mem_cgroup *mem)
+{
+struct cgroup *cgroup;
+unsigned long long min_free, free;
+
+min_free = res_counter_read_u64(mem-res, RES_LIMIT) -
+
On Tue, 19 Oct 2010 17:45:08 -0700
Greg Thelen gthe...@google.com wrote:
KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki kamezawa.hir...@jp.fujitsu.com writes:
BTW, how about supporing dirty_limit_in_bytes when use_hierarchy=0 or
leave it as broken when use_hierarchy=1 ? It seems we can only
support dirty_ratio when
On Wed, 20 Oct 2010 12:21:44 +0900
KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki kamezawa.hir...@jp.fujitsu.com wrote:
One bug fix here.
==
From: KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki kamezawa.hir...@jp.fujitsu.com
Now, at calculating dirty limit, vm_dirty_param() is called.
This function returns dirty-limit related parameters
On Tue, 19 Oct 2010 10:00:15 +0900
KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki kamezawa.hir...@jp.fujitsu.com wrote:
On Mon, 18 Oct 2010 17:39:44 -0700
Greg Thelen gthe...@google.com wrote:
If the current process is in a non-root memcg, then
global_dirty_limits() will consider the memcg dirty limit.
This allows
KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki kamezawa.hir...@jp.fujitsu.com writes:
On Tue, 19 Oct 2010 17:45:08 -0700
Greg Thelen gthe...@google.com wrote:
KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki kamezawa.hir...@jp.fujitsu.com writes:
BTW, how about supporing dirty_limit_in_bytes when use_hierarchy=0 or
leave it as broken when
KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki kamezawa.hir...@jp.fujitsu.com writes:
On Tue, 19 Oct 2010 10:00:15 +0900
KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki kamezawa.hir...@jp.fujitsu.com wrote:
On Mon, 18 Oct 2010 17:39:44 -0700
Greg Thelen gthe...@google.com wrote:
If the current process is in a non-root memcg, then
On Tue, 19 Oct 2010 21:25:53 -0700
Greg Thelen gthe...@google.com wrote:
KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki kamezawa.hir...@jp.fujitsu.com writes:
On Tue, 19 Oct 2010 17:45:08 -0700
Greg Thelen gthe...@google.com wrote:
KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki kamezawa.hir...@jp.fujitsu.com writes:
BTW, how about
On Tue, 19 Oct 2010 21:33:21 -0700
Greg Thelen gthe...@google.com wrote:
KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki kamezawa.hir...@jp.fujitsu.com writes:
On Tue, 19 Oct 2010 10:00:15 +0900
KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki kamezawa.hir...@jp.fujitsu.com wrote:
On Mon, 18 Oct 2010 17:39:44 -0700
Greg Thelen
On Wed, 20 Oct 2010 13:18:57 +0900
KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki kamezawa.hir...@jp.fujitsu.com wrote:
On Tue, 19 Oct 2010 10:00:15 +0900
KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki kamezawa.hir...@jp.fujitsu.com wrote:
On Mon, 18 Oct 2010 17:39:44 -0700
Greg Thelen gthe...@google.com wrote:
If the current process is in
On Wed, Oct 20, 2010 at 10:23:42AM +0800, Li Zefan wrote:
Stephen Hemminger wrote:
On Wed, 20 Oct 2010 09:43:06 +0800
Li Zefan l...@cn.fujitsu.com wrote:
Stephen Hemminger wrote:
On Tue, 19 Oct 2010 18:14:10 -0700
Paul Menage men...@google.com wrote:
On Tue, Oct 19, 2010 at 6:12 PM,
Fixed one here.
==
From: KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki kamezawa.hir...@jp.fujitsu.com
Now, at calculating dirty limit, vm_dirty_param() is called.
This function returns dirty-limit related parameters considering
memory cgroup settings.
Now, assume that vm_dirty_bytes=100M (global dirty limit) and
memory
On Mon, 18 Oct 2010 17:39:44 -0700
Greg Thelen gthe...@google.com wrote:
If the current process is in a non-root memcg, then
global_dirty_limits() will consider the memcg dirty limit.
This allows different cgroups to have distinct dirty limits
which trigger direct and background writeback at
40 matches
Mail list logo
