On 09/07/2018 02:34 AM, Michal Hocko wrote: > On Thu 06-09-18 15:53:34, Shuah Khan wrote: > [...] >> A few critical allocations could be satisfied and root cgroup prevails. It >> is not the >> intent to have exclusivity at the expense of the kernel. > > Well, it is not "few critical allocations". It can be a lot of > memory. Basically any GFP_KERNEL allocation. So how exactly you expect > this to work when you cannot estimate how much > memory will kernel eat? > >> >> This feature will allow a way to configure cpusets on non-NUMA for workloads >> that can >> benefit from the reservation and isolation that is available within the >> constraints of >> exclusive cpuset policies. > > AFAIR this was the first approach Google took for the memory isolation > and they moved over to memory cgroups.
In addition to isolation, being able to reserve a block instead is one of the issues I am looking to address. Unfortunately memory cgroups won't address that issue. I would recommend to talk to > those guys bebfore you introduce potentially a lot of code that will not > really work for the workload you indend it for. > Will you be able to point me to a good contact at Goggle and/or some pointers on finding discussion on the memory isolation. My searches on lkml came up short, thanks, -- Shuah
