[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <30986543-bd47-80bc-354c-727792f86547@suse.cz>
Date: Fri, 27 Apr 2018 13:06:56 +0200
From: Vlastimil Babka <vbabka@...e.cz>
To: Roman Gushchin <guro@...com>
Cc: David Rientjes <rientjes@...gle.com>,
Michal Hocko <mhocko@...nel.org>, linux-mm@...ck.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-api@...r.kernel.org,
kernel-team@...com, Matthew Wilcox <willy@...radead.org>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
Alexander Viro <viro@...iv.linux.org.uk>,
Johannes Weiner <hannes@...xchg.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] mm: don't show nr_indirectly_reclaimable in /proc/vmstat
On 04/27/2018 12:55 PM, Roman Gushchin wrote:
> On Fri, Apr 27, 2018 at 11:17:01AM +0200, Vlastimil Babka wrote:
>> On 04/26/2018 11:55 PM, David Rientjes wrote:
>>>
>>> Implementing this counter as a vmstat doesn't make much sense based on how
>>> it's used. Do you have a link to what Vlastimil proposed? I haven't seen
>>> mention of alternative ideas.
>>
>> It was in the original thread, see e.g.
>> <08524819-14ef-81d0-fa90-d7af13c6b9d5@...e.cz>
>>
>> However it will take some time to get that in mainline, and meanwhile
>> the current implementation does prevent a DOS. So I doubt it can be
>> fully reverted - as a compromise I just didn't want the counter to
>> become ABI. TBH though, other people at LSF/MM didn't seem concerned
>> that /proc/vmstat is an ABI that we can't change (i.e. counters have
>> been presumably removed in the past already).
>>
>
> Thank you, Vlastimil!
> That pretty much matches my understanding of the case.
>
> BTW, are you planning to work on supporting reclaimable objects
> by slab allocators?
Yeah, soon!
Vlastimil
> Thanks!
> --
> To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-api" in
> the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
> More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
>
Powered by blists - more mailing lists