On 05/29/2012 08:07 PM, Glauber Costa wrote:
On 05/29/2012 06:52 PM, Christoph Lameter wrote:
On Fri, 25 May 2012, Glauber Costa wrote:
> This patch charges allocation of a slab object to a particular
> memcg.
Ok so a requirement is to support tracking of individual slab
objects to cgroups? That is going to be quite expensive since it will
touch the hotpaths.
No, we track pages. But all the objects in the page belong to the same
cgroup.
Also, please note the following:
The code that relays us to the right cache, is wrapped inside a static
branch. Whoever is not using more than the root cgroup, will not suffer
a single bit.
If you are, but your process is in the right cgroup, you will
unfortunately pay function call penalty(*), but the code will make and
effort to detect that as early as possible and resume.
(*) Not even then if you fall in the following categories, that are
resolved inline:
+ if (!current->mm)
+ return cachep;
+ if (in_interrupt())
+ return cachep;
+ if (gfp & __GFP_NOFAIL)
+ return cachep;
--
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>