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 for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <f62cb0c2-e2a4-e104-e573-97b179e3fd84@gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 18 Mar 2025 20:03:44 +0800
From: Hao Jia <jiahao.kernel@...il.com>
To: Michal Koutný <mkoutny@...e.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



On 2025/3/18 18:17, Michal Koutný wrote:
> 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?


I'm sorry, I didn't understand what your suggestion was conveying.

Are you suggesting that the statistics for {pgscan, pgsteal}_{kswapd, 
direct, khugepaged} be merged into one?


In our current scenario, userspace proactive reclaimers trigger 
proactive memory reclaim on different memory cgroups. Tracking 
statistics related to proactive reclaim for each memory cgroup is very 
helpful for dynamically adjusting the frequency and amount of memory 
reclaimed for each cgroup.


Please correct me if I've misunderstood anything.

Thanks,
Hao