linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 1/2] mm: vmscan: Split proactive reclaim statistics from direct reclaim statistics

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: <qt73bnzu5k7ac4hnom7jwhsd3qsr7otwidu3ptalm66mbnw2kb@2uunju6q2ltn>
Date: Tue, 18 Mar 2025 11:17:44 +0100
From: Michal Koutný <mkoutny@...e.com>
To: Hao Jia <jiahao.kernel@...il.com>
Cc: hannes@...xchg.org, akpm@...ux-foundation.org, tj@...nel.org, 
	corbet@....net, mhocko@...nel.org, roman.gushchin@...ux.dev, 
	shakeel.butt@...ux.dev, muchun.song@...ux.dev, cgroups@...r.kernel.org, 
	linux-mm@...ck.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-doc@...r.kernel.org, 
	Hao Jia <jiahao1@...iang.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/2] mm: vmscan: Split proactive reclaim statistics from
 direct reclaim statistics

Hello.

On Tue, Mar 18, 2025 at 03:58:32PM +0800, Hao Jia <jiahao.kernel@...il.com> wrote:
> From: Hao Jia <jiahao1@...iang.com>
> 
> In proactive memory reclaim scenarios, it is necessary to
> accurately track proactive reclaim statistics to dynamically
> adjust the frequency and amount of memory being reclaimed
> proactively. Currently, proactive reclaim is included in
> direct reclaim statistics, which can make these
> direct reclaim statistics misleading.

How silly is it to have multiple memory.reclaim writers?
Would it make sense to bind those statistics to each such a write(r)
instead of the aggregated totals?

Michal

Download attachment "signature.asc" of type "application/pgp-signature" (229 bytes)