[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20170517155042.GA4133@castle>
Date: Wed, 17 May 2017 16:50:42 +0100
From: Roman Gushchin <guro@...com>
To: Balbir Singh <bsingharora@...il.com>
CC: Johannes Weiner <hannes@...xchg.org>, Tejun Heo <tj@...nel.org>,
Li Zefan <lizefan@...wei.com>,
Michal Hocko <mhocko@...nel.org>,
Vladimir Davydov <vdavydov.dev@...il.com>,
"cgroups@...r.kernel.org" <cgroups@...r.kernel.org>,
"open list:DOCUMENTATION" <linux-doc@...r.kernel.org>,
"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
linux-mm <linux-mm@...ck.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] mm: per-cgroup memory reclaim stats
On Wed, May 17, 2017 at 08:03:03AM +1000, Balbir Singh wrote:
> On Sat, May 13, 2017 at 2:42 AM, Johannes Weiner <hannes@...xchg.org> wrote:
> > On Fri, May 12, 2017 at 12:25:22PM +1000, Balbir Singh wrote:
> >>
> >> It sounds like memcg accumlates both global and memcg reclaim driver
> >> counts -- is this what we want?
> >
> > Yes.
> >
> > Consider a fully containerized system that is using only memory.low
> > and thus exclusively global reclaim to enforce the partitioning, NOT
> > artificial limits and limit reclaim. In this case, we still want to
> > know how much reclaim activity each group is experiencing.
>
> But its also confusing to see memcg.stat's value being greater
> than the global value? At-least for me. For example PGSTEAL_DIRECT
> inside a memcg > global value of PGSTEAL_DIRECT. Do we make
> memcg.stat values sum of all impact on memcg or local to memcg?
Yes, I think that global counters should include both results of
global and per-cgroup reclaim. I will prepare a separate patch for this.
Thank you!
Roman
Powered by blists - more mailing lists