[lkml]   [2018]   [Apr]   [26]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
SubjectRe: [PATCH 0/4] exit: Make unlikely case in mm_update_next_owner() more scalable
Michal Hocko <> writes:

> I've had a patch to remove owner few years back. It needed some work
> to finish but maybe that would be a better than try to make
> non-scalable thing suck less.

I have a question. Would it be reasonable to just have a mm->memcg?
That would appear to be the simplest solution to the problem.

That would require failing migration between memory cgroups if you are
not moving all of processes/threads that have a given mm_struct. That
should not be a huge restriction as typically it is only threads that
share a mm. Further the check should be straigh forward: counting the
number of threads and verifying the count matches the count on the


 \ /
  Last update: 2018-04-26 18:23    [W:0.285 / U:4.104 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site