[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <20250523172029.57745-1-sj@kernel.org>
Date: Fri, 23 May 2025 10:20:29 -0700
From: SeongJae Park <sj@...nel.org>
To: Baolin Wang <baolin.wang@...ux.alibaba.com>
Cc: SeongJae Park <sj@...nel.org>,
akpm@...ux-foundation.org,
david@...hat.com,
shakeelb@...gle.com,
lorenzo.stoakes@...cle.com,
Liam.Howlett@...cle.com,
vbabka@...e.cz,
rppt@...nel.org,
surenb@...gle.com,
mhocko@...e.com,
linux-mm@...ck.org,
linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH] mm: fix the inaccurate memory statistics issue for users
On Fri, 23 May 2025 11:16:13 +0800 Baolin Wang <baolin.wang@...ux.alibaba.com> wrote:
> On some large machines with a high number of CPUs running a 64K kernel,
What does 64K kernel means?
> we found that the 'RES' field is always 0 displayed by the top command
> for some processes, which will cause a lot of confusion for users.
>
> PID USER PR NI VIRT RES SHR S %CPU %MEM TIME+ COMMAND
> 875525 root 20 0 12480 0 0 R 0.3 0.0 0:00.08 top
> 1 root 20 0 172800 0 0 S 0.0 0.0 0:04.52 systemd
>
> The main reason is that the batch size of the percpu counter is quite large
> on these machines, caching a significant percpu value, since converting mm's
> rss stats into percpu_counter by commit f1a7941243c1 ("mm: convert mm's rss
> stats into percpu_counter"). Intuitively, the batch number should be optimized,
> but on some paths, performance may take precedence over statistical accuracy.
> Therefore, introducing a new interface to add the percpu statistical count
> and display it to users, which can remove the confusion. In addition, this
> change is not expected to be on a performance-critical path, so the modification
> should be acceptable.
>
> Signed-off-by: Baolin Wang <baolin.wang@...ux.alibaba.com>
Acked-by: SeongJae Park <sj@...nel.org>
Thanks,
SJ
[...]
Powered by blists - more mailing lists