[lkml]   [2011]   [Mar]   [28]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
    SubjectRe: [RFC 0/3] Implementation of cgroup isolation
    On Mon, 28 Mar 2011 11:01:18 -0700
    Ying Han <> wrote:

    > On Mon, Mar 28, 2011 at 2:39 AM, Michal Hocko <> wrote:
    > > Hi all,
    > >
    > > Memory cgroups can be currently used to throttle memory usage of a group of
    > > processes. It, however, cannot be used for an isolation of processes from
    > > the rest of the system because all the pages that belong to the group are
    > > also placed on the global LRU lists and so they are eligible for the global
    > > memory reclaim.
    > >
    > > This patchset aims at providing an opt-in memory cgroup isolation. This
    > > means that a cgroup can be configured to be isolated from the rest of the
    > > system by means of cgroup virtual filesystem (/dev/memctl/group/memory.isolated).
    > Thank you Hugh pointing me to the thread. We are working on similar
    > problem in memcg currently
    > Here is the problem we see:
    > 1. In memcg, a page is both on per-memcg-per-zone lru and global-lru.
    > 2. Global memory reclaim will throw page away regardless of cgroup.
    > 3. The zone->lru_lock is shared between per-memcg-per-zone lru and global-lru.
    > And we know:
    > 1. We shouldn't do global reclaim since it breaks memory isolation.
    > 2. There is no need for a page to be on both LRU list, especially
    > after having per-memcg background reclaim.
    > So our approach is to take off page from global lru after it is
    > charged to a memcg. Only pages allocated at root cgroup remains in
    > global LRU, and each memcg reclaims pages on its isolated LRU.

    Why you don't use cpuset and virtual nodes ? It's what you want.


     \ /
      Last update: 2011-03-29 02:21    [W:0.021 / U:0.972 seconds]
    ©2003-2017 Jasper Spaans. hosted at Digital OceanAdvertise on this site