mirror of https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Hugh Dickins <hugh@veritas.com>
To: Balbir Singh <balbir@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
Cc: Paul Menage <menage@google.com>,
	KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki <kamezawa.hiroyu@jp.fujitsu.com>,
	Pavel Emelyanov <xemul@openvz.org>,
	Sudhir Kumar <skumar@linux.vnet.ibm.com>,
	Li Zefan <lizf@cn.fujitsu.com>,
	David Rientjes <rientjes@google.com>,
	YAMAMOTO Takashi <yamamoto@valinux.co.jp>,
	Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
	linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: cgroup_disable=memory for 2.6.25?
Date: Thu, 3 Apr 2008 21:22:10 +0100 (BST)	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.4.64.0804032055590.8157@blonde.site> (raw)

Hi Balbir,

I'm rather surprised that nobody has pushed -mm's

cgroups-add-cgroup-support-for-enabling-controllers-at-boot-time.patch
cgroups-add-cgroup-support-for-enabling-controllers-at-boot-time-fix-boot-option-parsing.patch
memory-controller-make-memory-resource-control-aware-of-boot-options.patch

into 2.6.25: which was what I'd expected when I first suggested that
distros might want a way to build with the potential for mem cgroups,
but be able to switch off their significant overhead for everyone not
interested.

Ballpark figures, I'm trying to get this question out rather than
processing the exact numbers: CONFIG_CGROUP_MEM_RES_CTLR adds 15%
overhead to the affected paths, booting with cgroup_disable=memory
cuts that back to 1% overhead (due to slightly bigger struct page).

I'm no expert on distros, they may have no interest whatever in
CONFIG_CGROUP_MEM_RES_CTLR=y; and the rest of us can easily build
with or without it, or apply the cgroup_disable=memory patches.

But if those patches serve a purpose, shouldn't they be in 2.6.25?

Hugh

             reply	other threads:[~2008-04-03 20:24 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 5+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2008-04-03 20:22 Hugh Dickins [this message]
2008-04-03 20:27 ` Balbir Singh
2008-04-03 20:41   ` Andrew Morton
2008-04-04  1:18     ` KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki
2008-04-04  3:14     ` Balbir Singh

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=Pine.LNX.4.64.0804032055590.8157@blonde.site \
    --to=hugh@veritas.com \
    --cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
    --cc=balbir@linux.vnet.ibm.com \
    --cc=kamezawa.hiroyu@jp.fujitsu.com \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=lizf@cn.fujitsu.com \
    --cc=menage@google.com \
    --cc=rientjes@google.com \
    --cc=skumar@linux.vnet.ibm.com \
    --cc=xemul@openvz.org \
    --cc=yamamoto@valinux.co.jp \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox

all inboxes | Powered by JetHome®