[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <8735h5hml7.fsf@vajain21.in.ibm.com>
Date: Thu, 19 May 2022 15:26:52 +0530
From: Vaibhav Jain <vaibhav@...ux.ibm.com>
To: Greg Thelen <gthelen@...gle.com>, cgroups@...r.kernel.org,
linux-doc@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
linux-mm@...ck.org
Cc: Tejun Heo <tj@...nel.org>, Zefan Li <lizefan.x@...edance.com>,
Johannes Weiner <hannes@...xchg.org>,
Jonathan Corbet <corbet@....net>,
Michal Hocko <mhocko@...nel.org>,
Vladimir Davydov <vdavydov.dev@...il.com>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
"Aneesh Kumar K . V" <aneesh.kumar@...ux.ibm.com>,
Shakeel Butt <shakeelb@...gle.com>,
Yosry Ahmed <yosryahmed@...gle.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] memcg: provide reclaim stats via 'memory.reclaim'
Hi,
Thanks for looking into this patch,
Greg Thelen <gthelen@...gle.com> writes:
> Vaibhav Jain <vaibhav@...ux.ibm.com> wrote:
>
>> [1] Provides a way for user-space to trigger proactive reclaim by introducing
>> a write-only memcg file 'memory.reclaim'. However reclaim stats like number
>> of pages scanned and reclaimed is still not directly available to the
>> user-space.
>>
>> This patch proposes to extend [1] to make the memcg file 'memory.reclaim'
>> readable which returns the number of pages scanned / reclaimed during the
>> reclaim process from 'struct vmpressure' associated with each memcg. This should
>> let user-space asses how successful proactive reclaim triggered from memcg
>> 'memory.reclaim' was ?
>>
>> With the patch following command flow is expected:
>>
>> # echo "1M" > memory.reclaim
>>
>> # cat memory.reclaim
>> scanned 76
>> reclaimed 32
>
> I certainly appreciate the ability for shell scripts to demonstrate
> cgroup operations with textual interfaces, but such interface seem like
> they are optimized for ease of use by developers.
>
Agree that directly exposing nr_scanned/reclaimed might not be a useful
for users and certainly looks like a dev interface
> I wonder if for runtime production use an ioctl or netlink interface has
> been considered for cgroup? I don't think there are any yet, but such
> approaches seem like a more straightforward ways to get nontrivial
> input/outputs from a single call (e.g. like this proposal). And they
> have the benefit of not requiring ascii serialization/parsing overhead.
I think to a large degree eBPF and existing static tracepoints in vmscan
can provide access to these metrics as Shakeel Bhat pointed to earlier.
<snip>
--
Cheers
~ Vaibhav
Powered by blists - more mailing lists