linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 6/7] memcg: calc NUMA node's weight for scan.

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: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

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

Message-ID: <20110623133524.GJ31593@tiehlicka.suse.cz>
Date:	Thu, 23 Jun 2011 15:35:24 +0200
From:	Michal Hocko <mhocko@...e.cz>
To:	KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki <kamezawa.hiroyu@...fujitsu.com>
Cc:	"linux-mm@...ck.org" <linux-mm@...ck.org>,
	"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	"akpm@...ux-foundation.org" <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
	"nishimura@....nes.nec.co.jp" <nishimura@....nes.nec.co.jp>,
	"bsingharora@...il.com" <bsingharora@...il.com>,
	Ying Han <yinghan@...gle.com>,
	"hannes@...xchg.org" <hannes@...xchg.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 6/7] memcg: calc NUMA node's weight for scan.

On Thu 16-06-11 12:56:33, KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki wrote:
> From fb8aaa2c5f7fd99dfcb5d2ecb3c1226a58caafea Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
> From: KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki <kamezawa.hiroyu@...fujitsu.com>
> Date: Thu, 16 Jun 2011 10:05:46 +0900
> Subject: [PATCH 6/7] memcg: calc NUMA node's weight for scan.
> 
> Now, by commit 889976, numa node scan of memcg is in round-robin.
> As commit log says, "a better algorithm is needed".
> 
> for implementing some good scheduling, one of required things is
> defining importance of each node at LRU scanning.
> 
> This patch defines each node's weight for scan as
> 
> swappiness = (memcg's swappiness)? memcg's swappiness : 1
> FILE = inactive_file + (inactive_file_is_low)? active_file : 0
> ANON = inactive_anon + (inactive_anon_is_low)? active_anon : 0
> 
> weight = (FILE * (200-swappiness) + ANON * swappiness)/200.

Shouldn't we consider the node size?
If we have a node which is almost full with file cache and then other
node wich is much bigger and it is mostly occupied by anonymous memory
than the other node might end up with higher weight.

-- 
Michal Hocko
SUSE Labs
SUSE LINUX s.r.o.
Lihovarska 1060/12
190 00 Praha 9    
Czech Republic
--
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/