Re: [RFC][PATCH 3/4] Memory controller soft limit organize cgroups

[Balbir Singh]

* KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki <kamezawa.hiroyu@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> [2009-01-08 13:28:55]:

> On Thu, 8 Jan 2009 09:55:58 +0530
> Balbir Singh <balbir@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> 
> > * KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki <kamezawa.hiroyu@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> [2009-01-08 10:11:48]:
> > > Hmm,  Could you clarify following ?
> > >   
> > >   - Usage of memory at insertsion and usage of memory at reclaim is different.
> > >     So, this *sorted* order by RB-tree isn't the best order in general.
> > 
> > True, but we frequently update the tree at an interval of HZ/4.
> > Updating at every page fault sounded like an overkill and building the
> > entire tree at reclaim is an overkill too.
> > 
> "sort" is not necessary.
> If this feature is implemented as background daemon,
> just select the worst one at each iteration is enough.

OK, definitely an alternative worth considering, but the trade-off is
lazy building (your suggestion), which involves actively seeing the
usage of all cgroups (and if they are large, O(c), c is number of
cgroups can be quite a bit) versus building the tree as and when the
fault occurs and controlled by some interval.

-- 
	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/