summaryrefslogtreecommitdiff
diff options
context:
space:
mode:
authorKAMEZAWA Hiroyuki <kamezawa.hiroyu@jp.fujitsu.com>2009-06-17 16:27:19 -0700
committerLinus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>2009-06-18 13:03:48 -0700
commit22a668d7c3ef833e7d67e9cef587ecc78069d532 (patch)
treeda9f2e7ea7224c347dfe33ea9d4dddd944c861ac
parent8a9478ca7f4bcb8945cec7f95d52dae2d5e50cbd (diff)
downloadlinux-3.10-22a668d7c3ef833e7d67e9cef587ecc78069d532.tar.gz
linux-3.10-22a668d7c3ef833e7d67e9cef587ecc78069d532.tar.bz2
linux-3.10-22a668d7c3ef833e7d67e9cef587ecc78069d532.zip
memcg: fix behavior under memory.limit equals to memsw.limit
A user can set memcg.limit_in_bytes == memcg.memsw.limit_in_bytes when the user just want to limit the total size of applications, in other words, not very interested in memory usage itself. In this case, swap-out will be done only by global-LRU. But, under current implementation, memory.limit_in_bytes is checked at first and try_to_free_page() may do swap-out. But, that swap-out is useless for memsw.limit_in_bytes and the thread may hit limit again. This patch tries to fix the current behavior at memory.limit == memsw.limit case. And documentation is updated to explain the behavior of this special case. Signed-off-by: KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki <kamezawa.hiroyu@jp.fujitsu.com> Cc: Daisuke Nishimura <nishimura@mxp.nes.nec.co.jp> Cc: Balbir Singh <balbir@in.ibm.com> Cc: Li Zefan <lizf@cn.fujitsu.com> Cc: Dhaval Giani <dhaval@linux.vnet.ibm.com> Cc: YAMAMOTO Takashi <yamamoto@valinux.co.jp> Signed-off-by: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org> Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
-rw-r--r--Documentation/cgroups/memory.txt17
-rw-r--r--mm/memcontrol.c19
2 files changed, 30 insertions, 6 deletions
diff --git a/Documentation/cgroups/memory.txt b/Documentation/cgroups/memory.txt
index 1a608877b14..af48135bd9b 100644
--- a/Documentation/cgroups/memory.txt
+++ b/Documentation/cgroups/memory.txt
@@ -152,14 +152,19 @@ When swap is accounted, following files are added.
usage of mem+swap is limited by memsw.limit_in_bytes.
-Note: why 'mem+swap' rather than swap.
+* why 'mem+swap' rather than swap.
The global LRU(kswapd) can swap out arbitrary pages. Swap-out means
to move account from memory to swap...there is no change in usage of
-mem+swap.
-
-In other words, when we want to limit the usage of swap without affecting
-global LRU, mem+swap limit is better than just limiting swap from OS point
-of view.
+mem+swap. In other words, when we want to limit the usage of swap without
+affecting global LRU, mem+swap limit is better than just limiting swap from
+OS point of view.
+
+* What happens when a cgroup hits memory.memsw.limit_in_bytes
+When a cgroup his memory.memsw.limit_in_bytes, it's useless to do swap-out
+in this cgroup. Then, swap-out will not be done by cgroup routine and file
+caches are dropped. But as mentioned above, global LRU can do swapout memory
+from it for sanity of the system's memory management state. You can't forbid
+it by cgroup.
2.5 Reclaim
diff --git a/mm/memcontrol.c b/mm/memcontrol.c
index a83e0395444..6ceb6f2dbac 100644
--- a/mm/memcontrol.c
+++ b/mm/memcontrol.c
@@ -177,6 +177,9 @@ struct mem_cgroup {
unsigned int swappiness;
+ /* set when res.limit == memsw.limit */
+ bool memsw_is_minimum;
+
/*
* statistics. This must be placed at the end of memcg.
*/
@@ -847,6 +850,10 @@ static int mem_cgroup_hierarchical_reclaim(struct mem_cgroup *root_mem,
int ret, total = 0;
int loop = 0;
+ /* If memsw_is_minimum==1, swap-out is of-no-use. */
+ if (root_mem->memsw_is_minimum)
+ noswap = true;
+
while (loop < 2) {
victim = mem_cgroup_select_victim(root_mem);
if (victim == root_mem)
@@ -1752,6 +1759,12 @@ static int mem_cgroup_resize_limit(struct mem_cgroup *memcg,
break;
}
ret = res_counter_set_limit(&memcg->res, val);
+ if (!ret) {
+ if (memswlimit == val)
+ memcg->memsw_is_minimum = true;
+ else
+ memcg->memsw_is_minimum = false;
+ }
mutex_unlock(&set_limit_mutex);
if (!ret)
@@ -1799,6 +1812,12 @@ static int mem_cgroup_resize_memsw_limit(struct mem_cgroup *memcg,
break;
}
ret = res_counter_set_limit(&memcg->memsw, val);
+ if (!ret) {
+ if (memlimit == val)
+ memcg->memsw_is_minimum = true;
+ else
+ memcg->memsw_is_minimum = false;
+ }
mutex_unlock(&set_limit_mutex);
if (!ret)