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:   Wed, 2 Feb 2022 07:54:48 -0800
From:   Roman Gushchin <guro@...com>
To:     Michal Hocko <mhocko@...e.com>
CC:     Waiman Long <longman@...hat.com>,
        Johannes Weiner <hannes@...xchg.org>,
        Vladimir Davydov <vdavydov.dev@...il.com>,
        Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
        Petr Mladek <pmladek@...e.com>,
        Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>,
        Sergey Senozhatsky <senozhatsky@...omium.org>,
        Andy Shevchenko <andriy.shevchenko@...ux.intel.com>,
        Rasmus Villemoes <linux@...musvillemoes.dk>,
        <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, <cgroups@...r.kernel.org>,
        <linux-mm@...ck.org>, Ira Weiny <ira.weiny@...el.com>,
        Rafael Aquini <aquini@...hat.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 3/3] mm/page_owner: Dump memcg information

On Wed, Feb 02, 2022 at 09:57:18AM +0100, Michal Hocko wrote:
> On Tue 01-02-22 11:41:19, Waiman Long wrote:
> > 
> > On 2/1/22 05:49, Michal Hocko wrote:
> [...]
> > > Could you be more specific? Offlined memcgs are still part of the
> > > hierarchy IIRC. So it shouldn't be much more than iterating the whole
> > > cgroup tree and collect interesting data about dead cgroups.
> > 
> > What I mean is that without piggybacking on top of page_owner, we will to
> > add a lot more code to collect and display those information which may have
> > some overhead of its own.
> 
> Yes, there is nothing like a free lunch. Page owner is certainly a tool
> that can be used. My main concern is that this tool doesn't really
> scale on large machines with a lots of memory. It will provide a very
> detailed information but I am not sure this is particularly helpful to
> most admins (why should people process tons of allocation backtraces in
> the first place). Wouldn't it be sufficient to have per dead memcg stats
> to see where the memory sits?
> 
> Accumulated offline memcgs is something that bothers more people and I
> am really wondering whether we can do more for those people to evaluate
> the current state.

Cgroup v2 has corresponding counters for years. Or do you mean something different?

Powered by blists - more mailing lists