Re: [RFC][PATCH][0/4] Memory controller (RSS Control)

[Balbir Singh]

Magnus Damm wrote:
> On 2/19/07, Andrew Morton <akpm@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> > On Mon, 19 Feb 2007 12:20:19 +0530 Balbir Singh <balbir@xxxxxxxxxx> 
> > wrote:
> >
> > > This patch applies on top of Paul Menage's container patches (V7) 
> > posted at
> > >
> > >       http://lkml.org/lkml/2007/2/12/88
> > >
> > > It implements a controller within the containers framework for limiting
> > > memory usage (RSS usage).
>
> > The key part of this patchset is the reclaim algorithm:
> >
> > 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.
>
> Nice with a simple memory controller. The downside seems to be that it
> doesn't scale very well when it comes to reclaim, but maybe that just
> comes with being simple. Step by step, and maybe this is a good first
> step?

Thanks, I totally agree.

> Ideally I'd like to see unmapped pages handled on a per-container LRU
> with a fallback to the system-wide LRUs. Shared/mapped pages could be
> handled using PTE ageing/unmapping instead of page ageing, but that
> may consume too much resources to be practical.
>
> / magnus

Keeping unmapped pages per container sounds interesting. I am not quite
sure what PTE ageing, will it look it up.


--
	Warm Regards,
	Balbir Singh
-
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/