From: Michal Hocko <mhocko@suse•cz>
To: Tejun Heo <tj@kernel•org>
Cc: Hiroyuki Kamezawa <kamezawa.hiroyuki@gmail•com>,
David Rientjes <rientjes@google•com>,
"Aneesh Kumar K.V" <aneesh.kumar@linux•vnet.ibm.com>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation•org>,
Randy Dunlap <rdunlap@xenotime•net>,
Stephen Rothwell <sfr@canb•auug.org.au>,
linux-next@vger•kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger•kernel.org,
Richard Weinberger <richard@nod•at>,
KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki <kamezawa.hiroyu@jp•fujitsu.com>,
Johannes Weiner <hannes@cmpxchg•org>
Subject: Re: inux-next: Tree for Apr 27 (uml + mm/memcontrol.c)
Date: Mon, 7 May 2012 16:01:04 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20120507140103.GA4251@tiehlicka.suse.cz> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20120504172420.GF24639@google.com>
On Fri 04-05-12 10:24:20, Tejun Heo wrote:
> Hello,
>
> (cc'ing Johannes and Michal, hi guys)
>
> On Fri, May 04, 2012 at 08:17:11AM +0900, Hiroyuki Kamezawa wrote:
> > > Cgroups is moving to a single hierarchy for simplification, this isn't the
> > > only example of where this is currently suboptimal and it would be
> > > disappointing to solidify hugetlb control as part of memcg because of this
> > > current limitation that will be addressed by generic cgroups development.
> > >
> > > Folks, once these things are merged they become an API that can't easily
> > > be shifted around and seperated out later. The decision now is either to
> > > join hugetlb control with memcg forever when they act in very different
> > > ways or to seperate them so they can be used and configured individually.
> >
> > How do other guys think ? Tejun ?
>
> I don't know. hugetlbfs already is this franken thing which is
> separate from the usual memory management. It needing cgroup type
> resource limitation feels a bit weird to me. Isn't this supposed to
> be used in more-or-less tightly controlled setups? The whole thing
> needs to have its memory cut out from boot after all.
>
> If someone really has to add cgroup support to hugetlbfs, I'm more
> inclined to say let them play in their own corner unless incorporating
> it into memcg makes it inherently better.
I would agree with you but my impression from the previous (hugetlb)
implementation was that it is much harder to implement the charge moving
if we do not use page_cgroup.
Also the range tracking is rather ugly and clumsy.
> That said, I really don't know that much about mm. Johannes, Michal,
> what do you guys think?
>
> Thanks.
>
> --
> tejun
--
Michal Hocko
SUSE Labs
SUSE LINUX s.r.o.
Lihovarska 1060/12
190 00 Praha 9
Czech Republic
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2012-05-07 14:01 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 29+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2012-04-27 6:11 inux-next: Tree for Apr 27 Stephen Rothwell
2012-04-27 15:47 ` inux-next: Tree for Apr 27 (uml + mm/memcontrol.c) Randy Dunlap
2012-04-27 18:44 ` David Rientjes
2012-04-27 20:23 ` Andrew Morton
2012-04-27 21:27 ` David Rientjes
2012-04-27 21:36 ` Andrew Morton
2012-04-27 23:14 ` David Rientjes
2012-04-27 23:24 ` Andrew Morton
2012-04-27 23:52 ` David Rientjes
2012-04-28 18:01 ` Aneesh Kumar K.V
2012-05-03 9:13 ` David Rientjes
2012-05-03 10:30 ` Hiroyuki Kamezawa
2012-05-03 20:56 ` David Rientjes
2012-05-03 21:57 ` David Rientjes
2012-05-03 23:21 ` Hiroyuki Kamezawa
2012-05-03 23:33 ` Hiroyuki Kamezawa
2012-05-04 18:29 ` Aneesh Kumar K.V
2012-05-03 23:17 ` Hiroyuki Kamezawa
2012-05-04 17:24 ` Tejun Heo
2012-05-07 14:01 ` Michal Hocko [this message]
2012-05-07 17:08 ` Tejun Heo
2012-05-08 10:48 ` Michal Hocko
2012-05-03 13:54 ` Aneesh Kumar K.V
2012-05-03 20:39 ` David Rientjes
2012-04-28 0:45 ` Randy Dunlap
[not found] ` <20120427161146.95422142968526faaff615d4-3FnU+UHB4dNDw9hX6IcOSA@public.gmane.org>
2012-04-27 16:56 ` inux-next: Tree for Apr 27 (infiniband/hw/ocrdma) Randy Dunlap
[not found] ` <4F9ACFC4.6010002-/UHa2rfvQTnk1uMJSBkQmQ@public.gmane.org>
2012-04-27 23:54 ` Roland Dreier
2012-05-02 22:51 ` [PATCH] RDMA/ocrdma: Fix build with IPV6=n Roland Dreier
[not found] ` <1335999060-23779-1-git-send-email-roland-DgEjT+Ai2ygdnm+yROfE0A@public.gmane.org>
2012-05-03 0:29 ` Randy Dunlap
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20120507140103.GA4251@tiehlicka.suse.cz \
--to=mhocko@suse$(echo .)cz \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation$(echo .)org \
--cc=aneesh.kumar@linux$(echo .)vnet.ibm.com \
--cc=hannes@cmpxchg$(echo .)org \
--cc=kamezawa.hiroyu@jp$(echo .)fujitsu.com \
--cc=kamezawa.hiroyuki@gmail$(echo .)com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger$(echo .)kernel.org \
--cc=linux-next@vger$(echo .)kernel.org \
--cc=rdunlap@xenotime$(echo .)net \
--cc=richard@nod$(echo .)at \
--cc=rientjes@google$(echo .)com \
--cc=sfr@canb$(echo .)auug.org.au \
--cc=tj@kernel$(echo .)org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox