linux-kernel - Re: [RFC 0/4] Introduce unbalance proactive reclaim

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]

Message-ID: <ZVNEPRE_JxUaqw94@tiehlicka>
Date:   Tue, 14 Nov 2023 10:56:13 +0100
From:   Michal Hocko <mhocko@...e.com>
To:     Huan Yang <link@...o.com>
Cc:     "Huang, Ying" <ying.huang@...el.com>, Tejun Heo <tj@...nel.org>,
        Zefan Li <lizefan.x@...edance.com>,
        Johannes Weiner <hannes@...xchg.org>,
        Jonathan Corbet <corbet@....net>,
        Roman Gushchin <roman.gushchin@...ux.dev>,
        Shakeel Butt <shakeelb@...gle.com>,
        Muchun Song <muchun.song@...ux.dev>,
        Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
        David Hildenbrand <david@...hat.com>,
        Matthew Wilcox <willy@...radead.org>,
        Kefeng Wang <wangkefeng.wang@...wei.com>,
        Peter Xu <peterx@...hat.com>,
        "Vishal Moola (Oracle)" <vishal.moola@...il.com>,
        Yosry Ahmed <yosryahmed@...gle.com>,
        Liu Shixin <liushixin2@...wei.com>,
        Hugh Dickins <hughd@...gle.com>, cgroups@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-doc@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-mm@...ck.org, opensource.kernel@...o.com
Subject: Re: [RFC 0/4] Introduce unbalance proactive reclaim

On Tue 14-11-23 10:54:05, Michal Hocko wrote:
> On Mon 13-11-23 16:26:00, Huan Yang wrote:
> [...]
> > However, considering that we need to perform proactive reclaim in batches,
> > suppose that only 5% of the use-once page cache in this memcg can be
> > reclaimed,
> > but we need to call proactive memory reclaim step by step, such as 5%, 10%,
> > 15% ... 100%.
> 
> You haven't really explained this and I have asked several times IIRC.
> Why do you even need to do those batches? Why cannot you simply relly on
> the memory pressure triggering the memory reclaim? Do you have any
> actual numbers showing that being pro-active results in smaller
> latencies or anything that would show this is actually needed?

Just noticed dcd2eff8-400b-4ade-a5b2-becfe26b437b@...o.com, will reply
there.

-- 
Michal Hocko
SUSE Labs