linux-kernel - Re: Swappiness vs. mmap() and interactive response

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:	Tue, 28 Apr 2009 00:26:19 -0700
From:	Elladan <elladan@...imo.com>
To:	KOSAKI Motohiro <kosaki.motohiro@...fujitsu.com>
Cc:	Elladan <elladan@...imo.com>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	linux-mm <linux-mm@...ck.org>, Rik van Riel <riel@...hat.com>
Subject: Re: Swappiness vs. mmap() and interactive response

On Tue, Apr 28, 2009 at 03:52:29PM +0900, KOSAKI Motohiro wrote:
> Hi
> 
> > 3. cache limitation of memcgroup solve this problem?
> > 
> > I was unable to get this to work -- do you have some documentation handy?
> 
> Do you have kernel source tarball?
> Documentation/cgroups/memory.txt explain usage kindly.

Thank you.  My documentation was out of date.

I created a cgroup with limited memory and placed a copy command in it, and the
latency problem seems to essentially go away.  However, I'm also a bit
suspicious that my test might have become invalid, since my IO performance
seems to have dropped somewhat too.

So, am I right in concluding that this more or less implicates bad page
replacement as the culprit?  After I dropped vm caches and let my working set
re-form, the memory cgroup seems to be effective at keeping a large pool of
memory free from file pressure.

--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/