On Mon, May 21, 2018 at 01:16:40PM +0300, Kirill Tkhai wrote:
> >> +static int memcg_expand_one_shrinker_map(struct mem_cgroup *memcg,
> >> + int size, int old_size)
> >
> > Nit: No point in passing old_size here. You can instead use
> > memcg_shrinker_map_size di
On 20.05.2018 10:27, Vladimir Davydov wrote:
> On Fri, May 18, 2018 at 11:42:37AM +0300, Kirill Tkhai wrote:
>> Imagine a big node with many cpus, memory cgroups and containers.
>> Let we have 200 containers, every container has 10 mounts,
>> and 10 cgroups. All container tasks don't touch foreign
On Fri, May 18, 2018 at 11:42:37AM +0300, Kirill Tkhai wrote:
> Imagine a big node with many cpus, memory cgroups and containers.
> Let we have 200 containers, every container has 10 mounts,
> and 10 cgroups. All container tasks don't touch foreign
> containers mounts. If there is intensive pages w
Imagine a big node with many cpus, memory cgroups and containers.
Let we have 200 containers, every container has 10 mounts,
and 10 cgroups. All container tasks don't touch foreign
containers mounts. If there is intensive pages write,
and global reclaim happens, a writing task has to iterate
over a
4 matches
Mail list logo