On Fri, 2 Mar 2012 14:28:53 +1100, David Gibson <dwg@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > On Thu, Mar 01, 2012 at 02:40:29PM -0800, Andrew Morton wrote: > > On Thu, 1 Mar 2012 14:46:11 +0530 > > "Aneesh Kumar K.V" <aneesh.kumar@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > > > This patchset implements a memory controller extension to control > > > HugeTLB allocations. It is similar to the existing hugetlb quota > > > support in that, the limit is enforced at mmap(2) time and not at > > > fault time. HugeTLB's quota mechanism limits the number of huge pages > > > that can allocated per superblock. > > > > > > For shared mappings we track the regions mapped by a task along with the > > > memcg. We keep the memory controller charged even after the task > > > that did mmap(2) exits. Uncharge happens during truncate. For Private > > > mappings we charge and uncharge from the current task cgroup. > > > > I haven't begin to get my head around this yet, but I'd like to draw > > your attention to https://lkml.org/lkml/2012/2/15/548. That fix has > > been hanging around for a while, but I haven't done anything with it > > yet because I don't like its additional blurring of the separation > > between hugetlb core code and hugetlbfs. I want to find time to sit > > down and see if the fix can be better architected but haven't got > > around to that yet. > > So.. that version of the fix I specifically rebuilt to address your > concerns about that blurring - in fact I think it reduces the current > layer blurring. I haven't had any reply - what problems do see it as > still having? > https://lkml.org/lkml/2012/2/16/179 ? That is a serious issue isn't it ? -aneesh -- 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>