OpenVZ Forum


Home » Mailing lists » Devel » [patch00/05]: Containers(V2)- Introduction
Re: [ckrm-tech] [patch00/05]: Containers(V2)- Introduction [message #6976 is a reply to message #6975] Fri, 29 September 2006 00:22 Go to previous messageGo to previous message
Rohit Seth is currently offline  Rohit Seth
Messages: 101
Registered: August 2006
Senior Member
On Fri, 2006-09-29 at 03:23 +0530, Balbir Singh wrote:
> Rohit Seth wrote:
> > On Thu, 2006-09-28 at 13:31 +0530, Balbir Singh wrote:

> >
> >> (b) The other option is to do what the resource group memory controller does -
> >> build a per group LRU list of pages (active, inactive) and reclaim
> >> them using the existing code (by passing the correct container pointer,
> >> instead of the zone pointer). One disadvantage of this approach is that
> >> the global reclaim is impacted as the global LRU list is broken. At the
> >> expense of another list, we could maintain two lists, global LRU and
> >> container LRU lists. Depending on the context of the reclaim - (container
> >> over limit, memory pressure) we could update/manipulate both lists.
> >> This approach is definitely very expensive.
> >>
> >
> > Two LRUs is a nice idea. Though I don't think it will go too far. It
> > will involve adding another list pointers in the page structure. I
> > agree that the mem handler is not optimal at all but I don't want to
> > make it mimic kernel reclaimer at the same time.
>
> One possible solution is to move the container tracking out of the pages and
> into address_space and anon_vma. I guess this functionality will complicate
> task migration and accounting a bit though.
>

In the next version, I'm removing the per page pointer for container.
address_space already has a container pointer, I'm adding a pointer in
anon_vma as well. And that does seem to be complicating the accounting
just a wee bit. Though on its own, it is not helping the reclaim part.

I'll have to see how to handle kernel pages w/o a per page pointer.

> >
> >> 2. Comments on task migration support
> >>
> >> (a) One of the issues I found while using the container code is that, one could
> >> add a task to a container say "a". "a" gets charged for the tasks usage,
> >> when the same task moves to a different container say "b", when the task
> >> exits, the credit goes to "b" and "a" remains indefinitely charged.
> >>
> > hmm, when the task is removed from "a" then "a" gets the credits for the
> > amount of anon memory that is used by the task. Or do you mean
> > something different.
>
> Aah, I see. Once possible minor concern here is that a task could hope across
> several containers, it could map files in each container and allocate page
> cache pages, when it reaches the limit, it could hop to another container
> and carry on until it hits the limit there.
>
If there are multiple containers that a process can hop to then yes that
will happen.



-rohit

Report message to a moderator

[Message index]
 
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Previous Topic: Re: Re: namespace and nsproxy syscalls
Next Topic: [Lxc-devel] [patch 093/203] pidspace: is_init()
Goto Forum:
  

[ Syndicate this forum (XML) ] [ RSS ] [ PDF ]

Current Time: Thu Jul 03 21:58:47 GMT 2025

Total time taken to generate the page: 0.02205 seconds
Powered by FUDforum Powered by Virtuozzo Containers