Re: [RFC][PATCH 0/5] memcg softlimit (Another one) v4
From: Balbir Singh
Date: Thu Mar 12 2009 - 01:04:47 EST
* KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki <kamezawa.hiroyu@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> [2009-03-12 13:39:49]:
> On Thu, 12 Mar 2009 09:16:47 +0530
> Balbir Singh <balbir@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> > * KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki <kamezawa.hiroyu@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> [2009-03-12 09:52:47]:
> > I've tested so far by
> >
> > Creating two cgroups and then
> >
> > a. Assigning limits of 1G and 2G and run memory allocation and touch
> > test
> softlimit ?
>
Yes
> > b. Same as (a) with 1G and 1G
> > c. Same as (a) with 0 and 1G
> > d. Same as (a) with 0 and 0
> >
> > More comments in induvidual patches.
> >
> Then,
> 1. what's the number of active threads ?
One for each process in the two groups
> 2. what's the number of cpus ?
4
> 3. what's the numa configuration, if numa ?
Fake NUMA with nodes = 4, I have DMA, DMA32 and NORMAL split across
nodes.
> 4. what's the zone configuration ?
> 5. what's arch ?
> 6. what's amount of total memory ?
I have 4GB on x86-64 system (Quad Core)
> 7. Do you find difference in behavior with and without softlimit ?
Very much so.. I see the resources being shared as defined by soft
limits.
> 8. Do you tested *this* version ?
>
Not yet.. you just posted it. I am testing my v5, which I'll post
soon. I am seeing very good results with v5. I'll test yours later
today.
> 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/