From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mail144.messagelabs.com (mail144.messagelabs.com [216.82.254.51]) by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 1BE695F0001 for ; Wed, 8 Apr 2009 04:05:15 -0400 (EDT) Received: from m1.gw.fujitsu.co.jp ([10.0.50.71]) by fgwmail6.fujitsu.co.jp (Fujitsu Gateway) with ESMTP id n3885Bsm011034 for (envelope-from kamezawa.hiroyu@jp.fujitsu.com); Wed, 8 Apr 2009 17:05:11 +0900 Received: from smail (m1 [127.0.0.1]) by outgoing.m1.gw.fujitsu.co.jp (Postfix) with ESMTP id 73D7345DD74 for ; Wed, 8 Apr 2009 17:05:11 +0900 (JST) Received: from s1.gw.fujitsu.co.jp (s1.gw.fujitsu.co.jp [10.0.50.91]) by m1.gw.fujitsu.co.jp (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4A60345DD72 for ; Wed, 8 Apr 2009 17:05:11 +0900 (JST) Received: from s1.gw.fujitsu.co.jp (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by s1.gw.fujitsu.co.jp (Postfix) with ESMTP id 17495E0800E for ; Wed, 8 Apr 2009 17:05:11 +0900 (JST) Received: from ml13.s.css.fujitsu.com (ml13.s.css.fujitsu.com [10.249.87.103]) by s1.gw.fujitsu.co.jp (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8D5A21DB8018 for ; Wed, 8 Apr 2009 17:05:10 +0900 (JST) Date: Wed, 8 Apr 2009 17:03:41 +0900 From: KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki Subject: Re: [RFI] Shared accounting for memory resource controller Message-Id: <20090408170341.437c215b.kamezawa.hiroyu@jp.fujitsu.com> In-Reply-To: <20090408074809.GF7082@balbir.in.ibm.com> References: <20090407071825.GR7082@balbir.in.ibm.com> <20090407163331.8e577170.kamezawa.hiroyu@jp.fujitsu.com> <20090407080355.GS7082@balbir.in.ibm.com> <20090407172419.a5f318b9.kamezawa.hiroyu@jp.fujitsu.com> <20090408052904.GY7082@balbir.in.ibm.com> <20090408151529.fd6626c2.kamezawa.hiroyu@jp.fujitsu.com> <20090408070401.GC7082@balbir.in.ibm.com> <20090408160733.4813cb8d.kamezawa.hiroyu@jp.fujitsu.com> <20090408071115.GD7082@balbir.in.ibm.com> <20090408161824.26f47077.kamezawa.hiroyu@jp.fujitsu.com> <20090408074809.GF7082@balbir.in.ibm.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-linux-mm@kvack.org To: balbir@linux.vnet.ibm.com Cc: "linux-mm@kvack.org" , Andrew Morton , "lizf@cn.fujitsu.com" , Rik van Riel , Bharata B Rao , Dhaval Giani , KOSAKI Motohiro , "linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" List-ID: On Wed, 8 Apr 2009 13:18:09 +0530 Balbir Singh wrote: > > > 3. Using the above, we can then try to (using an algorithm you > > > proposed), try to do some work for figuring out the shared percentage. > > > > > This is the point. At last. Why "# of shared pages" is important ? > > > > I posted this in my motivation yesterday. # of shared pages can help > plan the system better and the size of the cgroup. A cgroup might have > small usage_in_bytes but large number of shared pages. We need a > metric that can help figure out the fair usage of the cgroup. > I don't fully understand but NR_FILE_MAPPED is an information in /proc/meminfo. I personally think I want to support information in /proc/meminfo per memcg. Hmm ? then, if you add a hook, it seems == mm/rmap.c 689 void page_add_file_rmap(struct page *page) 690 { 691 if (atomic_inc_and_test(&page->_mapcount)) 692 __inc_zone_page_state(page, NR_FILE_MAPPED); 693 } == page_remove_rmap(struct page *page) 739 __dec_zone_page_state(page, 740 PageAnon(page) ? NR_ANON_PAGES : NR_FILE_MAPPED); == Is good place to go, maybe. page->page_cgroup->mem_cgroup-> inc/dec counter ? Maybe the patch itself will be simple, overhead is unknown.. Thanks, -Kame -- To unsubscribe, send a message with 'unsubscribe linux-mm' in the body to majordomo@kvack.org. For more info on Linux MM, see: http://www.linux-mm.org/ . Don't email: email@kvack.org