On 01/10/2013 02:06 AM, Anton Vorontsov wrote:
On Wed, Jan 09, 2013 at 01:55:14PM -0800, Tejun Heo wrote: [...]
We can use mempressure w/o memcg, and even then it can (or should :) be useful (for cpuset, for example).
The problem is that you end with, at the very least, duplicate hierarchical accounting mechanisms which overlap with each other while, most likely, being slightly different. About the same thing happened with cpu and cpuacct controllers and we're now trying to deprecate the latter.
Yeah. I started answering your comments about hierarchical accounting, looked into the memcg code, and realized that *this* is where I need the memcg stuff. :)
Thus yes, I guess I'll have to integrate it with memcg, or sort of.
That being my point since the beginning. To generate per-memcg pressure, you need memcg anyway. So you would have to have two different and orthogonal mechanisms, and therefore, double account.