linux-kernel - Re: [RFC] mm: bail out in shrin_inactive

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]

Message-ID: <20160726074650.GW11400@suse.de>
Date:	Tue, 26 Jul 2016 08:46:50 +0100
From:	Mel Gorman <mgorman@...e.de>
To:	Minchan Kim <minchan@...nel.org>
Cc:	Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
	Johannes Weiner <hannes@...xchg.org>, linux-mm@...ck.org,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, Michal Hocko <mhocko@...nel.org>,
	Vladimir Davydov <vdavydov@...tuozzo.com>
Subject: Re: [RFC] mm: bail out in shrin_inactive_list

On Tue, Jul 26, 2016 at 10:21:57AM +0900, Minchan Kim wrote:
> > > I believe proper fix is to modify get_scan_count. IOW, I think
> > > we should introduce lruvec_reclaimable_lru_size with proper
> > > classzone_idx but I don't know how we can fix it with memcg
> > > which doesn't have zone stat now. should introduce zone stat
> > > back to memcg? Or, it's okay to ignore memcg?
> > > 
> > 
> > I think it's ok to ignore memcg in this case as a memcg shrink is often
> > going to be for pages that can use highmem anyway.
> 
> So, you mean it's okay to ignore kmemcg case?
> If memcg guys agree it, I want to make get_scan_count consider
> reclaimable lru size under the reclaim constraint, instead.
> 

For now, I believe yet. My understanding is that the primary use cases
for kmemcg is systems running large numbers of containers. It consider
it extremely unlikely that large 32-bit systems are being used for large
numbers of containers and require usage of kmemcg.

-- 
Mel Gorman
SUSE Labs