On Fri, Jan 14, 2011 at 3:06 PM, Li Zefan wrote:
> Nick Piggin wrote:
>> It looks like it is just a missing parent->child lock order annotation, but
>> mainline cgroupfs code looks to be OK there. What does
>> cgroup_clear_directory() look like in mmotm?
>
> It
On Fri, Jan 14, 2011 at 2:34 AM, wrote:
> Seen booting yesterday's linux-next, was not present in 2.6.37-rc7-mmotm1202.
>
> Not sure if it's an selinux or cgroup issue, so I'm throwing it at every
> address I can find for either. This is easily replicatable and happens at
> every boot, so I can
On Mon, Mar 22, 2010 at 08:12:45PM -0400, Oren Laadan wrote:
> On Mon, 22 Mar 2010, Nick Piggin wrote:
>
> > On Thu, Mar 18, 2010 at 08:59:45PM -0400, Oren Laadan wrote:
> > > These two are used in the next patch when calling vfs_read/write()
> >
> > Said nex
On Mon, Mar 22, 2010 at 06:22:32AM -0700, Matt Helsley wrote:
> On Mon, Mar 22, 2010 at 09:30:35PM +1100, Nick Piggin wrote:
> > On Thu, Mar 18, 2010 at 08:59:47PM -0400, Oren Laadan wrote:
> > > + /*
> > > + * if seen first time, this will add 'file' to the
On Mon, Mar 22, 2010 at 03:16:35AM -0700, Matt Helsley wrote:
> On Mon, Mar 22, 2010 at 05:34:28PM +1100, Nick Piggin wrote:
> > On Thu, Mar 18, 2010 at 08:59:46PM -0400, Oren Laadan wrote:
> > Hmm, what does generic_file_checkpoint mean? A NULL checkpoint op means
> >
On Thu, Mar 18, 2010 at 08:59:47PM -0400, Oren Laadan wrote:
> @@ -531,6 +533,15 @@ static int init_checkpoint_ctx(struct ckpt_ctx *ctx,
> pid_t pid)
> return -EINVAL; /* cleanup by ckpt_ctx_free() */
> }
>
> + /* root vfs (FIX: WILL CHANGE with mnt-ns etc */
> + tas
On Thu, Mar 18, 2010 at 08:59:46PM -0400, Oren Laadan wrote:
> While we assume all normal files and directories can be checkpointed,
> there are, as usual in the VFS, specialized places that will always
> need an ability to override these defaults. Although we could do this
> completely in the chec
On Thu, Mar 18, 2010 at 08:59:45PM -0400, Oren Laadan wrote:
> These two are used in the next patch when calling vfs_read/write()
Said next patch didn't seem to make it to fsdevel.
Should it at least go to fs/internal.h?
>
> Signed-off-by: Oren Laadan
> Acked-by: Serge E. Hallyn
> ---
> fs/r
Hi,
On Thursday 18 October 2007 16:24, Vasily Averin wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> could anybody explain how "inactive" may be much greater than "cached"?
> stress test (http://weather.ou.edu/~apw/projects/stress/) that writes into
> removed files in cycle puts the node to the following state:
>
> MemTotal
On Thursday 18 October 2007 17:14, Vasily Averin wrote:
> Nick Piggin wrote:
> > Hi,
> >
> > On Thursday 18 October 2007 16:24, Vasily Averin wrote:
> >> Hi all,
> >>
> >> could anybody explain how "inactive" may be much greater than "
On Wednesday 03 October 2007 16:18, H. Peter Anvin wrote:
> Nick Piggin wrote:
> >> This should work because the result gets used before reading again:
> >>
> >> read_cr3(a);
> >> write_cr3(a | 1);
> >> read_cr3(a);
> >>
> >>
On Wednesday 03 October 2007 04:27, Chuck Ebbert wrote:
> On 10/02/2007 11:28 AM, Arjan van de Ven wrote:
> > On Tue, 02 Oct 2007 18:08:32 +0400
> >
> > Kirill Korotaev <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >> Some gcc versions (I checked at least 4.1.1 from RHEL5 & 4.1.2 from
> >> gentoo) can generate inco
Eric W. Biederman wrote:
> Nick Piggin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>>It can be done trivially without performing any IO or swap, yes.
>
>
> Please give me a rough sketch of how to do so.
Reading sparse files is just one I had in mind. But I'm not very
creative co
Eric W. Biederman wrote:
> Nick Piggin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
>
>>Eric W. Biederman wrote:
>>
>>>Dave Hansen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>>So, I think we have a difference of opinion. I think
Eric W. Biederman wrote:
> Dave Hansen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
>
>>So, I think we have a difference of opinion. I think it's _all_ about
>>memory pressure, and you think it is _not_ about accounting for memory
>>pressure. :) Perhaps we mean different things, but we appear to
>>disagree gr
Kirill Korotaev wrote:
>>The approaches I have seen that don't have a struct page pointer, do
>>intrusive things like try to put hooks everywhere throughout the kernel
>>where a userspace task can cause an allocation (and of course end up
>>missing many, so they aren't secure anyway)... and basica
Vaidyanathan Srinivasan wrote:
> Accounting becomes easy if we have a container pointer in struct page.
> This can form base ground for building controllers since any memory
> related controller would be interested in tracking pages. However we
> still want to evaluate if we can build them witho
Balbir Singh wrote:
> Nick Piggin wrote:
>> And strangely, this example does not go outside the parameters of
>> what you asked for AFAIKS. In the worst case of one container getting
>> _all_ the shared pages, they will still remain inside their maximum
>> rss limit.
&g
Eric W. Biederman wrote:
> Nick Piggin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
>
>>Eric W. Biederman wrote:
>>
>>>First touch page ownership does not guarantee give me anything useful
>>>for knowing if I can run my application or not. Because of page
>&
Eric W. Biederman wrote:
> Herbert Poetzl <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
>
>>On Mon, Mar 12, 2007 at 09:50:08AM -0700, Dave Hansen wrote:
>>
>>>On Mon, 2007-03-12 at 19:23 +0300, Kirill Korotaev wrote:
>>>
For these you essentially need per-container page->_mapcount counter,
otherwise you
On Mon, Mar 12, 2007 at 12:23:00PM +0300, Dmitriy Monakhov wrote:
> Nick Piggin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> > On Mon, Mar 12, 2007 at 11:55:30AM +0300, Dmitriy Monakhov wrote:
> >> Nick Piggin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> >>
> >> > On M
On Mon, Mar 12, 2007 at 11:55:30AM +0300, Dmitriy Monakhov wrote:
> Nick Piggin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> > On Mon, Mar 12, 2007 at 10:58:10AM +0300, Dmitriy Monakhov wrote:
> >> @@ -2240,6 +2241,29 @@ ssize_t generic_file_aio_write(struct kiocb *iocb,
&
On Mon, Mar 12, 2007 at 10:57:53AM +0300, Dmitriy Monakhov wrote:
> I realy don't want to be annoying by sending this patcheset over and over
> again. If anyone think this patch is realy cappy, please comment what
> exectly is bad. Thank you.
Doesn't seem like a bad idea.
>
> Changes:
> - pat
On Mon, Mar 12, 2007 at 10:58:10AM +0300, Dmitriy Monakhov wrote:
> I realy don't want to be annoying by sending this patcheset over and over
> again, i just want the issue to be solved. If anyone think this solution
> is realy cappy, please comment what exectly is bad. Thank you.
If you don't get
24 matches
Mail list logo
