[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <ZLsFBHqCQdPHoZVw@slm.duckdns.org>
Date: Fri, 21 Jul 2023 12:21:56 -1000
From: Tejun Heo <tj@...nel.org>
To: Tvrtko Ursulin <tvrtko.ursulin@...ux.intel.com>
Cc: Intel-gfx@...ts.freedesktop.org, dri-devel@...ts.freedesktop.org,
cgroups@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
Johannes Weiner <hannes@...xchg.org>,
Zefan Li <lizefan.x@...edance.com>,
Dave Airlie <airlied@...hat.com>,
Daniel Vetter <daniel.vetter@...ll.ch>,
Rob Clark <robdclark@...omium.org>,
Stéphane Marchesin <marcheu@...omium.org>,
"T . J . Mercier" <tjmercier@...gle.com>, Kenny.Ho@....com,
Christian König <christian.koenig@....com>,
Brian Welty <brian.welty@...el.com>,
Tvrtko Ursulin <tvrtko.ursulin@...el.com>,
Maarten Lankhorst <maarten.lankhorst@...ux.intel.com>,
Eero Tamminen <eero.t.tamminen@...el.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 16/17] cgroup/drm: Expose memory stats
On Wed, Jul 12, 2023 at 12:46:04PM +0100, Tvrtko Ursulin wrote:
> $ cat drm.memory.stat
> card0 region=system total=12898304 shared=0 active=0 resident=12111872 purgeable=167936
> card0 region=stolen-system total=0 shared=0 active=0 resident=0 purgeable=0
>
> Data is generated on demand for simplicty of implementation ie. no running
> totals are kept or accounted during migrations and such. Various
> optimisations such as cheaper collection of data are possible but
> deliberately left out for now.
>
> Overall, the feature is deemed to be useful to container orchestration
> software (and manual management).
>
> Limits, either soft or hard, are not envisaged to be implemented on top of
> this approach due on demand nature of collecting the stats.
So, yeah, if you want to add memory controls, we better think through how
the fd ownership migration should work.
Thanks.
--
tejun
Powered by blists - more mailing lists