Re: [RFC][PATCH] memcg: Replace mm->owner with mm->memcg

2018-05-03 Thread Balbir Singh
On Fri, May 4, 2018 at 1:11 AM, Eric W. Biederman wrote: > Balbir Singh writes: > >> On Tue, 01 May 2018 12:35:16 -0500 >> ebied...@xmission.com (Eric W. Biederman) wrote: >> >>> Recently it was reported that mm_update_next_owner could get into >>> cases where it was executing it's fallback for_e

Re: [RFC][PATCH] memcg: Replace mm->owner with mm->memcg

2018-05-03 Thread Eric W. Biederman
Balbir Singh writes: > On Tue, 01 May 2018 12:35:16 -0500 > ebied...@xmission.com (Eric W. Biederman) wrote: > >> Recently it was reported that mm_update_next_owner could get into >> cases where it was executing it's fallback for_each_process part of >> the loop and thus taking up a lot of time.

Re: [RFC][PATCH] memcg: Replace mm->owner with mm->memcg

2018-05-02 Thread Balbir Singh
On Tue, 01 May 2018 12:35:16 -0500 ebied...@xmission.com (Eric W. Biederman) wrote: > Recently it was reported that mm_update_next_owner could get into > cases where it was executing it's fallback for_each_process part of > the loop and thus taking up a lot of time. > > To deal with this replace

Re: [RFC][PATCH] memcg: Replace mm->owner with mm->memcg

2018-05-02 Thread Eric W. Biederman
Johannes Weiner writes: > Hi Eric, > > On Wed, May 02, 2018 at 10:47:08AM +0200, Michal Hocko wrote: >> [CC johannes and Tejun as well. I am sorry but my backlog is so huge I >> will not get to this week.] >> >> On Tue 01-05-18 12:35:16, Eric W. Biederman wrote: >> > Recently it was reported tha

Re: [RFC][PATCH] memcg: Replace mm->owner with mm->memcg

2018-05-02 Thread Johannes Weiner
Hi Eric, On Wed, May 02, 2018 at 10:47:08AM +0200, Michal Hocko wrote: > [CC johannes and Tejun as well. I am sorry but my backlog is so huge I > will not get to this week.] > > On Tue 01-05-18 12:35:16, Eric W. Biederman wrote: > > Recently it was reported that mm_update_next_owner could get int

Re: [RFC][PATCH] memcg: Replace mm->owner with mm->memcg

2018-05-02 Thread Michal Hocko
[CC johannes and Tejun as well. I am sorry but my backlog is so huge I will not get to this week.] On Tue 01-05-18 12:35:16, Eric W. Biederman wrote: > Recently it was reported that mm_update_next_owner could get into > cases where it was executing it's fallback for_each_process part of > the loop