Re: [PATCH -mm][preview] memcg: a patch series for next [0/9]

[KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki]

On Wed, 20 Aug 2008 09:00:50 +0530
Balbir Singh <balbir@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

> KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki wrote:
> > Hi, 
> > 
> > This post is for showing what I'm trying now.
> > 
> > This patch set is for memory resource controller.
> > 4 purposes here.
> >   - improve performance of memcg.
> >   - remove lock_page_cgroup()
> >   - making page_cgroup->flags to be atomic_ops.
> >   - support mem+swap controller.
> > 
> > But this is still under test and the series is not well organised.
> > and base tree is old. (2.6.27-rc1-mm1) I'll rebase this set to newer mmtom tree.
> > 
> > Maybe this set have some troubles/objections but I think the direction is not bad.
> > 
> > Patch description. (patch ordering is bad. I'll fix in the next post.)
> > 
> > [1/9] ... private_counter ...replace res_counter with my own counter.
> >           This is for supporting mem+swap controller.
> >           (And I think memcg has a bit different characteristics from other
> >            users of res_counter....)
> > 
> > [2/9] ... change-order-uncharge ...
> >           This patch is for making it easy to handle swap-cache.
> > 
> > [3/9] ... atomic_flags
> >           This patch changes operations for page_cgroup->flags to be atomic_ops.
> > 
> > [4/9] ... delayed freeing.
> >           delaying to free page_cgroup at uncharge.
> > 
> > [5/9] ... RCU freeing of page_cgroup
> >           free page_cgroup by RCU.
> > 
> > [6/9] ... lockress page cgroup.
> >           remove lock_page_cgroup() and use RCU semantics.
> > 
> > [7/9] ... add preftech
> >           add prefetch() macro
> > 
> > [8/9] ... mem+swap controller base.
> >           introduce mem+swap controller. A bit big patch....but have tons of TODO.
> >           and have troubles. (it seems it's difficult to cause OOM killer.)
> > 
> > [9/9] ... mem+swap controller control files.
> >           add mem+swap controller's control files.
> > 
> > I'd like to push patch [2,3,4,5,6,7] first.
> > 
> 
> I took a quick look at the patches, patch 1 seemed not so clear, why can't we
> enhance or fix resource counters? I'll review/test the patches tonight.
> 
patch 1 is for patch 8. (patch order is too bad.)
please ignore this version. this is just a preview.(Sorry)

I'm now writing easier-to-read one,

thanks,
-kame





> -- 
> 	Balbir
> 

--
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/