On Thu 03-01-19 04:05:30, Yang Shi wrote: > > Currently, force empty reclaims memory synchronously when writing to > memory.force_empty. It may take some time to return and the afterwards > operations are blocked by it. Although it can be interrupted by signal, > it still seems suboptimal. Why it is suboptimal? We are doing that operation on behalf of the process requesting it. What should anybody else pay for it? In other words why should we hide the overhead? > Now css offline is handled by worker, and the typical usecase of force > empty is before memcg offline. So, handling force empty in css offline > sounds reasonable. Hmm, so I guess you are talking about echo 1 > $MEMCG/force_empty rmdir $MEMCG and you are complaining that the operation takes too long. Right? Why do you care actually? -- Michal Hocko SUSE Labs
