From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org>
Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand
	id S1759556Ab0JGCFT (ORCPT <rfc822;w@1wt.eu>);
	Wed, 6 Oct 2010 22:05:19 -0400
Received: from TYO201.gate.nec.co.jp ([202.32.8.193]:63770 "EHLO
	tyo201.gate.nec.co.jp" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org
	with ESMTP id S1751862Ab0JGCFS (ORCPT
	<rfc822;linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>);
	Wed, 6 Oct 2010 22:05:18 -0400
Date: Thu, 7 Oct 2010 10:54:56 +0900
From: Daisuke Nishimura <nishimura@mxp.nes.nec.co.jp>
To: KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki <kamezawa.hiroyu@jp.fujitsu.com>
Cc: Minchan Kim <minchan.kim@gmail.com>, Greg Thelen <gthelen@google.com>,
        Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
        linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-mm@kvack.org,
        containers@lists.osdl.org, Andrea Righi <arighi@develer.com>,
        Balbir Singh <balbir@linux.vnet.ibm.com>,
        Daisuke Nishimura <nishimura@mxp.nes.nec.co.jp>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 04/10] memcg: disable local interrupts in
 lock_page_cgroup()
Message-Id: <20101007105456.d86d8092.nishimura@mxp.nes.nec.co.jp>
In-Reply-To: <20101007093545.429fe04a.kamezawa.hiroyu@jp.fujitsu.com>
References: <1286175485-30643-1-git-send-email-gthelen@google.com>
	<1286175485-30643-5-git-send-email-gthelen@google.com>
	<20101005160332.GB9515@barrios-desktop>
	<xr93wrpwkypv.fsf@ninji.mtv.corp.google.com>
	<AANLkTikKXNx-Cj2UY+tJj8ifC+Je5WDbS=eR6xsKM1uU@mail.gmail.com>
	<20101007093545.429fe04a.kamezawa.hiroyu@jp.fujitsu.com>
X-Mailer: Sylpheed 3.0.3 (GTK+ 2.10.14; i686-pc-mingw32)
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
List-ID: <linux-kernel.vger.kernel.org>
X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org

On Thu, 7 Oct 2010 09:35:45 +0900
KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki <kamezawa.hiroyu@jp.fujitsu.com> wrote:

> On Wed, 6 Oct 2010 09:15:34 +0900
> Minchan Kim <minchan.kim@gmail.com> wrote:
> 
> > First of all, we could add your patch as it is and I don't expect any
> > regression report about interrupt latency.
> > That's because many embedded guys doesn't use mmotm and have a
> > tendency to not report regression of VM.
> > Even they don't use memcg. Hmm...
> > 
> > I pass the decision to MAINTAINER Kame and Balbir.
> > Thanks for the detail explanation.
> > 
> 
> Hmm. IRQ delay is a concern. So, my option is this. How do you think ?
> 
> 1. remove local_irq_save()/restore() in lock/unlock_page_cgroup().
>    yes, I don't like it.
> 
> 2. At moving charge, do this:
> 	a) lock_page()/ or trylock_page()
> 	b) wait_on_page_writeback()
> 	c) do move_account under lock_page_cgroup().
> 	c) unlock_page()
> 
> 
> Then, Writeback updates will never come from IRQ context while
> lock/unlock_page_cgroup() is held by move_account(). There will be no race.
> 
hmm, if we'll do that, I think we need to do that under pte_lock in
mem_cgroup_move_charge_pte_range(). But, we can't do wait_on_page_writeback()
under pte_lock, right? Or, we need re-organize current move-charge implementation.

Thanks,
Daisuke Nishimura.