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

[Balbir Singh <balbir@in.ibm.com>]

Kirill Korotaev wrote:
> > On 2/19/07, Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org> wrote:
> >
> > > 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.
> >
> > I think it's OK for a container to consume lots of system time during
> > reclaim, as long as we can account that time to the container involved
> > (i.e. if it's done during direct reclaim rather than by something like
> > kswapd).
> hmm, is it ok to scan 100Gb of RAM for 10MB RAM container?
> in UBC patch set we used page beancounters to track containter pages.
> This allows to make efficient scan contoler and reclamation.
>
> Thanks,
> Kirill

Hi, Kirill,

Yes, that's a problem, but I think it's a problem that can be solved
in steps. First step, add reclaim. Second step, optimize reclaim.

--
	Warm Regards,
	Balbir Singh
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/