From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from psmtp.com (na3sys010amx166.postini.com [74.125.245.166]) by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 4BD096B13F2 for ; Wed, 8 Feb 2012 02:55:26 -0500 (EST) Received: by qcsd16 with SMTP id d16so162153qcs.14 for ; Tue, 07 Feb 2012 23:55:25 -0800 (PST) MIME-Version: 1.0 From: Greg Thelen Date: Tue, 7 Feb 2012 23:55:05 -0800 Message-ID: Subject: memcg writeback (was Re: [Lsf-pc] [LSF/MM TOPIC] memcg topics.) Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Sender: owner-linux-mm@kvack.org List-ID: To: Wu Fengguang Cc: Jan Kara , "bsingharora@gmail.com" , Hugh Dickins , Michal Hocko , linux-mm@kvack.org, Mel Gorman , Ying Han , "hannes@cmpxchg.org" , lsf-pc@lists.linux-foundation.org, KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki On Fri, Feb 3, 2012 at 1:40 AM, Wu Fengguang wrote: > If moving dirty pages out of the memcg to the 20% global dirty pages > pool on page reclaim, the above OOM can be avoided. It does change the > meaning of memory.limit_in_bytes in that the memcg tasks can now > actually consume more pages (up to the shared global 20% dirty limit). This seems like an easy change, but unfortunately the global 20% pool has some shortcomings for my needs: 1. the global 20% pool is not moderated. One cgroup can dominate it and deny service to other cgroups. 2. the global 20% pool is free, unaccounted memory. Ideally cgroups only use the amount of memory specified in their memory.limit_in_bytes. The goal is to sell portions of a system. Global resource like the 20% are an undesirable system-wide tax that's shared by jobs that may not even perform buffered writes. 3. Setting aside 20% extra memory for system wide dirty buffers is a lot of memory. This becomes a larger issue when the global dirty_ratio is higher than 20%. -- To unsubscribe, send a message with 'unsubscribe linux-mm' in the body to majordomo@kvack.org. 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: email@kvack.org