lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2009]   [Sep]   [4]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: [mmotm][experimental][PATCH] coalescing charge
On Fri, 4 Sep 2009 15:40:50 +0900
Daisuke Nishimura <nishimura@mxp.nes.nec.co.jp> wrote:

> On Fri, 4 Sep 2009 14:26:54 +0900, KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki <kamezawa.hiroyu@jp.fujitsu.com> wrote:
> > On Fri, 4 Sep 2009 14:21:43 +0900
> > KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki <kamezawa.hiroyu@jp.fujitsu.com> wrote:
> >
> > > On Fri, 4 Sep 2009 14:11:57 +0900
> > > Daisuke Nishimura <nishimura@mxp.nes.nec.co.jp> wrote:
> > >
> > > > > > > Signed-off-by: KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki <kamezawa.hiroyu@jp.fujitsu.com>
> > > > > > It looks basically good. I'll do some tests with all patches applied.
> > > > > >
> > > > > thanks.
> > > > >
> > > > it seems that these patches make rmdir stall again...
> > > > This batched charge patch seems not to be the (only) suspect, though.
> > > >
> > > Ouch, no probelm with the latest mmotm ? I think this charge-uncharge-offload
> > > patch set doesn't use css_set()/get()...
> > > Hm, softlimit related parts ?
> > >
> hmm, these patches(including softlimit cleanup) seems not to be guilt.
> Current(I'm using mmotm-2009-08-27-16-51) mmotm seems to be broken about memcg's rmdir.
>
> I must admit I've not tested mmotm for several months because I have been working
> on stabilizing mainline for a long time...
>
> > Ah, one more question. What memory.usage_in_bytes shows in that case ?
> > If not zero, charge/uncharge coalescing is guilty.
> >
> usage_in_bytes is 0.
> I've confirmed by crash command that the mem_cgroup has extra ref counts.
>
> I'll dig more..
>
Ok, then, I and you see different problem...
Hmm..css refcnt leak. I'll dig, too. I hope we can catch it before sneaking
into mainline.

Thanks,
-Kame

>
> Thanks,
> Daisuke Nishimura.
>



\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2009-09-04 08:55    [W:0.161 / U:2.612 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site