Messages in this thread | | | Date | Tue, 31 Mar 2009 14:05:02 +0900 | From | KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki <> | Subject | Re: [RFC][PATCH] memcg soft limit (yet another new design) v1 |
| |
On Tue, 31 Mar 2009 10:30:55 +0530 Balbir Singh <balbir@linux.vnet.ibm.com> wrote:
> * KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki <kamezawa.hiroyu@jp.fujitsu.com> [2009-03-31 08:55:38]: > > > On Sat, 28 Mar 2009 23:57:47 +0530 > > Balbir Singh <balbir@linux.vnet.ibm.com> wrote: > > > > > * Balbir Singh <balbir@linux.vnet.ibm.com> [2009-03-28 23:41:00]: > > > > > > > * KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki <kamezawa.hiroyu@jp.fujitsu.com> [2009-03-27 13:59:33]: > > > > > > > > > ==brief test result== > > > > > On 2CPU/1.6GB bytes machine. create group A and B > > > > > A. soft limit=300M > > > > > B. no soft limit > > > > > > > > > > Run a malloc() program on B and allcoate 1G of memory. The program just > > > > > sleeps after allocating memory and no memory refernce after it. > > > > > Run make -j 6 and compile the kernel. > > > > > > > > > > When vm.swappiness = 60 => 60MB of memory are swapped out from B. > > > > > When vm.swappiness = 10 => 1MB of memory are swapped out from B > > > > > > > > > > If no soft limit, 350MB of swap out will happen from B.(swapiness=60) > > > > > > > > > > > > > I ran the same tests, booted the machine with mem=1700M and maxcpus=2 > > > > > > > > Here is what I see with > > > > > > I meant to say, Here is what I see with my patches (v7) > > > > > Hmm, I saw 250MB of swap out ;) As I reported before. > > Swapout for A? For A it is expected, but for B it is not. How many > nodes do you have on your machine? Any fake numa nodes? > Of course, from B.
Nothing special boot options. My test was on VMware 2cpus/1.6GB memory.
I wonder why swapout can be 0 on your test. Do you add some extra hooks to kswapd ?
Thanks, -Kame
| |