[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20111003122511.GA29982@shutemov.name>
Date: Mon, 3 Oct 2011 15:25:11 +0300
From: "Kirill A. Shutemov" <kirill@...temov.name>
To: Glauber Costa <glommer@...allels.com>
Cc: linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, paul@...lmenage.org,
lizf@...fujitsu.com, kamezawa.hiroyu@...fujitsu.com,
ebiederm@...ssion.com, davem@...emloft.net, gthelen@...gle.com,
netdev@...r.kernel.org, linux-mm@...ck.org, avagin@...allels.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 7/8] Display current tcp memory allocation in kmem
cgroup
On Mon, Oct 03, 2011 at 04:19:18PM +0400, Glauber Costa wrote:
> On 10/03/2011 04:14 PM, Kirill A. Shutemov wrote:
> > On Mon, Oct 03, 2011 at 02:18:42PM +0400, Glauber Costa wrote:
> >> This patch introduces kmem.tcp_current_memory file, living in the
> >> kmem_cgroup filesystem. It is a simple read-only file that displays the
> >> amount of kernel memory currently consumed by the cgroup.
> >>
> >> Signed-off-by: Glauber Costa<glommer@...allels.com>
> >> CC: David S. Miller<davem@...emloft.net>
> >> CC: Hiroyouki Kamezawa<kamezawa.hiroyu@...fujitsu.com>
> >> CC: Eric W. Biederman<ebiederm@...ssion.com>
> >> ---
> >> Documentation/cgroups/memory.txt | 1 +
> >> mm/memcontrol.c | 11 +++++++++++
> >> 2 files changed, 12 insertions(+), 0 deletions(-)
> >>
> >> diff --git a/Documentation/cgroups/memory.txt b/Documentation/cgroups/memory.txt
> >> index 1ffde3e..f5a539d 100644
> >> --- a/Documentation/cgroups/memory.txt
> >> +++ b/Documentation/cgroups/memory.txt
> >> @@ -79,6 +79,7 @@ Brief summary of control files.
> >> memory.independent_kmem_limit # select whether or not kernel memory limits are
> >> independent of user limits
> >> memory.kmem.tcp.max_memory # set/show hard limit for tcp buf memory
> >> + memory.kmem.tcp.current_memory # show current tcp buf memory allocation
> >
> > Both are in pages, right?
> > Shouldn't it be scaled to bytes and named uniform with other memcg file?
> > memory.kmem.tcp.limit_in_bytes/usage_in_bytes.
> >
> You are absolutely correct.
> Since the internal tcp comparison works, I just ended up never noticing
> this.
Should we have failcnt and max_usage_in_bytes for tcp as well?
--
Kirill A. Shutemov
--
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/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists