Message-ID: <CAC8teKX7xHK67AJ6pQuTSr4=21FoPkoDL7jfxx-TaGKx5_BFhQ@mail.gmail.com>
Date:	Wed, 7 Dec 2011 22:17:51 +0800
From:	Zhu Yanhai <zhu.yanhai@...il.com>
To:	Glauber Costa <glommer@...allels.com>
Cc:	Paul Turner <pjt@...gle.com>,
	Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra@...llo.nl>,
	cgroups@...r.kernel.org,
	linux-kernel <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, devel@...nvz.org,
	Linux Containers <containers@...ts.osdl.org>,
	KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki <kamezawa.hiroyu@...fujitsu.com>,
	Balbir Singh <bsingharora@...il.com>,
	Serge Hallyn <serge.hallyn@...onical.com>,
	Frederic Weisbecker <fweisbec@...il.com>,
	lxc-users@...ts.sourceforge.net
Subject: Re: How to draw values for /proc/stat

2011/12/5 Glauber Costa <glommer@...allels.com>:
> Hi,
>
> Specially Peter and Paul, but all the others:
>
> As you can see in https://lkml.org/lkml/2011/12/4/178, and in my answer to
> that, there is a question - one I've asked before but without that much of
> an audience - of whether /proc files read from process living on cgroups
> should display global or per-cgroup resources.
>
> In the past, I was arguing for a knob to control that, but I recently
> started to believe that a knob here will only overcomplicate matters:
> if you live in a cgroup, you should display only the resources you can
> possibly use. Global is for whoever is in the main cgroup.
>
> Now, it comes two questions:
> 1) Do you agree with that, for files like /proc/stat ? I think the most
> important part is to be consistent inside the system, regardless of what is
> done
>
> 2) Will cpuacct stay? I think if it does, that becomes almost mandatory (at
> least the bind mount idea is pretty much over here), because drawing value
> for /proc/stat becomes quite complex.
> The cpuacct cgroup can provide user, sys, etc values. But we also have:
>
> * nr_context_switches,
> * jiffies since boot,
> * total_forks,
> * nr_running,
> * nr_iowait,
>
> Now I doubt any of us want to see /proc/stat extended to accommodate things
> like nr_context_switches, or even worse, nr_running. The way I see it, there
> are two options here:
>
>  a) moving everything to cpu cgroup so we keep all values being drawn
>    from the same place
>  b) Collect that info from multiple places in a transparent way. ctx,
>    nr_running and nr_iowait will probably come from cpu. jiffies can
>    come from wherever, and maybe we can even draw total_forks
>    from Frederic's and avoid counting it twice.
> --
> To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe cgroups" in
> the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
> More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html

Hi,
I think making /proc files read from process living on cgroups display
per-cgroup resources is a good idea, at least from a common user's
perspective. We are (well, we will) setup a large cluster with
lxc/cgroup for some backend online services in the next months, and
one gap we see is the entries under /proc are not virtualized enough,
especially those performance counters, not only schedule counters
(e.g. /proc/diskstat). Although we can read some numbers in the host
from blkio controller's counters like blkio.io_serviced,
blkio.io_service_time etc, it would be very convenient if the entries
under /proc are virtualized, as we can deploy various existing
maintenance tools directly in the containers, without developing
another monitors. So the over-cost for maintenance can be low.

Let's include lxc-user mailing list for this topic.

--
Thanks,
Zhu Yanhai
--
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