On 09/13/2011 03:46 PM, Paul Menage wrote:
On Tue, Sep 13, 2011 at 11:11 AM, Glauber Costa<glommer@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
What if they are all updated under the same lock ?
Right, that would be the kind of optimization that would remove the
need for worrying about whether or not to account it. It would
probably mean creating some memcg-specific structures like
res-counters that could handle multiple values, since you'd need to
update both the kernel charge and the total charge, in this cgroup
*and* its ancestors.
Paul
If we do that, we may have to commit to an intermediary user interface -
with controls to to determine if kernel memory is billed to kernel or
total, a enable/disable file, just to later render it pointless by a new
optimization - that we seem to agree that seems possible.
I think it is preferred to always assume kernel memory is accounted to
the kernel, and when we optimize it, no changes are made to what's
exposed to userspace.
--
To unsubscribe, send a message with 'unsubscribe linux-mm' in
the body to majordomo@xxxxxxxxx. For more info on Linux MM,
see: http://www.linux-mm.org/ .
Fight unfair telecom internet charges in Canada: sign http://stopthemeter.ca/
Don't email: <a href=mailto:"dont@xxxxxxxxx";> email@xxxxxxxxx </a>