linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH RFC 00/14] The new slab memory controller

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: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:   Thu, 19 Sep 2019 22:39:18 +0900
From:   Suleiman Souhlal <suleiman@...gle.com>
To:     Roman Gushchin <guro@...com>
Cc:     linux-mm@...ck.org, Michal Hocko <mhocko@...nel.org>,
        Johannes Weiner <hannes@...xchg.org>,
        Linux Kernel <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        kernel-team@...com, Shakeel Butt <shakeelb@...gle.com>,
        Vladimir Davydov <vdavydov.dev@...il.com>,
        Waiman Long <longman@...hat.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH RFC 00/14] The new slab memory controller

On Fri, Sep 6, 2019 at 6:57 AM Roman Gushchin <guro@...com> wrote:
> The patchset has been tested on a number of different workloads in our
> production. In all cases, it saved hefty amounts of memory:
> 1) web frontend, 650-700 Mb, ~42% of slab memory
> 2) database cache, 750-800 Mb, ~35% of slab memory
> 3) dns server, 700 Mb, ~36% of slab memory

Do these workloads cycle through a lot of different memcgs?

For workloads that don't, wouldn't this approach potentially use more
memory? For example, a workload where everything is in one or two
memcgs, and those memcgs last forever.

-- Suleiman