Hi. kamezawa.hiroyu@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx wrote: >>> At first look, remembering mm struct is not very good. >>> Remembering swap controller itself is better. >> The swap_cgroup when the page(and page_cgroup) is allocated and >> the swap_cgroup when the page is going to be swapped out may be >> different by swap_cgroup_move_task(), so I think swap_cgroup >> to be charged should be determined at the point of swapout. >> > Accounting swap against an entity which allocs anon memory is > not strange. Problem here is move_task itself. > Now, charges against anon is not moved when a task which uses it > is moved. please fix this behavior first if you think this is > problematic. > > But, finally, a daemon driven by process event connector > determines the group before process starts using anon. It's > doubtful that it's worth to add complicated/costly ones. > I agree with you. I think the current behavior of move_task is problematic, and should fix it. But fixing it would be difficult and add a costly process, so I should consider more. Thanks, Daisuke Nishimura. _______________________________________________ Containers mailing list Containers@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://lists.linux-foundation.org/mailman/listinfo/containers
