On 08/31/2017 12:58 PM, Konstantin Khorenko wrote:
> Do we want to push it to mainstream as well?
>
I don't think so. Distributions are slowly moving towards v2 cgroup, where
kmem limit simply doesn't exists. And for legacy cgroup v1 lack of reclaim on
kmem limit
hit wasn't a mistake but a
Do we want to push it to mainstream as well?
--
Best regards,
Konstantin Khorenko,
Virtuozzo Linux Kernel Team
On 08/25/2017 06:38 PM, Andrey Ryabinin wrote:
If kmem limit on memcg reached, we go into memory reclaim,
and reclaim everything we can, including page cache and anon.
Reclaiming
On 08/28/2017 12:02 PM, Stanislav Kinsburskiy wrote:
>
>
> 25.08.2017 18:38, Andrey Ryabinin пишет:
>> If kmem limit on memcg reached, we go into memory reclaim,
>> and reclaim everything we can, including page cache and anon.
>> Reclaiming page cache or anon won't help since we need to lower
>>
25.08.2017 18:38, Andrey Ryabinin пишет:
> If kmem limit on memcg reached, we go into memory reclaim,
> and reclaim everything we can, including page cache and anon.
> Reclaiming page cache or anon won't help since we need to lower
> only kmem usage. This patch fixes the problem by avoiding
>
