[Devel] Re: Re: [RFC/PATCH] cgroup swap subsystem

[kamezawa.hiroyu at jp.fujitsu.com]

>> At first look, remembering mm struct is not very good.
>> Remembering swap controller itself is better.
>
>The swap_cgroup when the page(and page_cgroup) is allocated and
>the swap_cgroup when the page is going to be swapped out may be
>different by swap_cgroup_move_task(), so I think swap_cgroup
>to be charged should be determined at the point of swapout.
>
Accounting swap against an entity which allocs anon memory is
not strange. Problem here is move_task itself.
Now, charges against anon is not moved when a task which uses it
is moved. please fix this behavior first if you think this is
problematic.

But, finally, a daemon driven by process event connector
determines the group before process starts using anon. It's
doubtful that it's worth to add complicated/costly ones.


Thanks,
-Kame
_______________________________________________
Containers mailing list
Containers at lists.linux-foundation.org
https://lists.linux-foundation.org/mailman/listinfo/containers