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
| ||
|
Date: Wed, 25 May 2022 13:31:42 -0700 From: Yosry Ahmed <yosryahmed@...gle.com> To: Michal Hocko <mhocko@...e.com> Cc: Johannes Weiner <hannes@...xchg.org>, Vaibhav Jain <vaibhav@...ux.ibm.com>, Cgroups <cgroups@...r.kernel.org>, linux-doc@...r.kernel.org, Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, Linux-MM <linux-mm@...ck.org>, Tejun Heo <tj@...nel.org>, Zefan Li <lizefan.x@...edance.com>, Jonathan Corbet <corbet@....net>, 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>, David Rientjes <rientjes@...gle.com> Subject: Re: [PATCH] memcg: provide reclaim stats via 'memory.reclaim' On Wed, May 25, 2022 at 1:59 AM Michal Hocko <mhocko@...e.com> wrote: > > On Tue 24-05-22 12:01:01, Yosry Ahmed wrote: > > On Tue, May 24, 2022 at 4:45 AM Johannes Weiner <hannes@...xchg.org> wrote: > > > > > > On Mon, May 23, 2022 at 03:50:34PM -0700, Yosry Ahmed wrote: > > > > I think it might be useful to have a dedicated entry in memory.stat > > > > for proactively reclaimed memory. A case where this would be useful is > > > > tuning and evaluating userspace proactive reclaimers. For instance, if > > > > a userspace agent is asking the kernel to reclaim 100M, but it could > > > > only reclaim 10M, then most probably the proactive reclaimer is not > > > > using a good methodology to figure out how much memory do we need to > > > > reclaim. > > > > > > > > IMO this is more useful, and a superset of just reading the last > > > > reclaim request status through memory.reclaim (read stat before and > > > > after). > > > > > > +1 > > > > It might also be useful to have a breakdown of this by memory type: > > file, anon, or shrinkers. > > > > It would also fit in nicely with a potential type=file/anon/shrinker > > argument to memory.reclaim. Thoughts on this? > > Can we start simple and see what real usecases actually will need? Agreed. Let's start with a single proactively reclaimed memory stat and then add subcategories if/when needed. > -- > Michal Hocko > SUSE Labs
Powered by blists - more mailing lists