On 11/27/2013 02:47 AM, Dave Chinner wrote:
On Tue, Nov 26, 2013 at 10:47:00AM +0400, Vladimir Davydov wrote:
Hi,
Thank you for the review. I agree with all your comments and I'll
resend the fixed version soon.
If anyone still has something to say about the patchset, I'd be glad
to hear from
On Tue, Nov 26, 2013 at 10:47:00AM +0400, Vladimir Davydov wrote:
> Hi,
>
> Thank you for the review. I agree with all your comments and I'll
> resend the fixed version soon.
>
> If anyone still has something to say about the patchset, I'd be glad
> to hear from them.
Please CC me on all the
On Tue, 26 Nov 2013 16:55:43 +0400 Vladimir Davydov
wrote:
> What do you think about splitting this set into two main series as follows:
>
> 1) Prepare vmscan to kmemcg-aware shrinkers; would include patches 1-7
> of this set.
> 2) Make fs shrinkers memcg-aware; would include patches 9-11 of
On 11/26/2013 10:47 AM, Vladimir Davydov wrote:
Hi,
Thank you for the review. I agree with all your comments and I'll
resend the fixed version soon.
If anyone still has something to say about the patchset, I'd be glad
to hear from them.
On 11/25/2013 09:41 PM, Johannes Weiner wrote:
I
On 11/26/2013 10:47 AM, Vladimir Davydov wrote:
Hi,
Thank you for the review. I agree with all your comments and I'll
resend the fixed version soon.
If anyone still has something to say about the patchset, I'd be glad
to hear from them.
On 11/25/2013 09:41 PM, Johannes Weiner wrote:
I
On Tue, 26 Nov 2013 16:55:43 +0400 Vladimir Davydov vdavy...@parallels.com
wrote:
What do you think about splitting this set into two main series as follows:
1) Prepare vmscan to kmemcg-aware shrinkers; would include patches 1-7
of this set.
2) Make fs shrinkers memcg-aware; would include
On Tue, Nov 26, 2013 at 10:47:00AM +0400, Vladimir Davydov wrote:
Hi,
Thank you for the review. I agree with all your comments and I'll
resend the fixed version soon.
If anyone still has something to say about the patchset, I'd be glad
to hear from them.
Please CC me on all the
On 11/27/2013 02:47 AM, Dave Chinner wrote:
On Tue, Nov 26, 2013 at 10:47:00AM +0400, Vladimir Davydov wrote:
Hi,
Thank you for the review. I agree with all your comments and I'll
resend the fixed version soon.
If anyone still has something to say about the patchset, I'd be glad
to hear from
Hi,
Thank you for the review. I agree with all your comments and I'll resend
the fixed version soon.
If anyone still has something to say about the patchset, I'd be glad to
hear from them.
On 11/25/2013 09:41 PM, Johannes Weiner wrote:
I ran out of steam reviewing these because there were
I ran out of steam reviewing these because there were too many things
that should be changed in the first couple patches.
I realize this is frustrating to see these type of complaints in v11
of a patch series, but the review bandwidth was simply exceeded back
when Glauber submitted this along
This patchset implements targeted shrinking for memcg when kmem limits are
present. So far, we've been accounting kernel objects but failing allocations
when short of memory. This is because our only option would be to call the
global shrinker, depleting objects from all caches and breaking
This patchset implements targeted shrinking for memcg when kmem limits are
present. So far, we've been accounting kernel objects but failing allocations
when short of memory. This is because our only option would be to call the
global shrinker, depleting objects from all caches and breaking
I ran out of steam reviewing these because there were too many things
that should be changed in the first couple patches.
I realize this is frustrating to see these type of complaints in v11
of a patch series, but the review bandwidth was simply exceeded back
when Glauber submitted this along
Hi,
Thank you for the review. I agree with all your comments and I'll resend
the fixed version soon.
If anyone still has something to say about the patchset, I'd be glad to
hear from them.
On 11/25/2013 09:41 PM, Johannes Weiner wrote:
I ran out of steam reviewing these because there were
I've run kernbench in a first-level memory cgroup to prove there is no
performance degradation due to the series, and here are the results.
HW: 2 socket x 6 core x 2 HT (2 NUMA nodes, 24 logical CPUs in total),
24 GB RAM (12+12)
Test case: time make -j48 vmlinux
Legend:
base - 3.12.0-rc6
I've run kernbench in a first-level memory cgroup to prove there is no
performance degradation due to the series, and here are the results.
HW: 2 socket x 6 core x 2 HT (2 NUMA nodes, 24 logical CPUs in total),
24 GB RAM (12+12)
Test case: time make -j48 vmlinux
Legend:
base - 3.12.0-rc6
This patchset implements targeted shrinking for memcg when kmem limits are
present. So far, we've been accounting kernel objects but failing allocations
when short of memory. This is because our only option would be to call the
global shrinker, depleting objects from all caches and breaking
This patchset implements targeted shrinking for memcg when kmem limits are
present. So far, we've been accounting kernel objects but failing allocations
when short of memory. This is because our only option would be to call the
global shrinker, depleting objects from all caches and breaking
18 matches
Mail list logo
