From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.0 required=3.0 tests=MAILING_LIST_MULTI, SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id E8B2BC433DF for ; Fri, 3 Jul 2020 06:35:53 +0000 (UTC) Received: from kanga.kvack.org (kanga.kvack.org [205.233.56.17]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id B587D208C7 for ; Fri, 3 Jul 2020 06:35:52 +0000 (UTC) DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.3.2 mail.kernel.org B587D208C7 Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dmarc=fail (p=none dis=none) header.from=kernel.org Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=owner-linux-mm@kvack.org Received: by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix) id 6D2818D004B; Fri, 3 Jul 2020 02:35:52 -0400 (EDT) Received: by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix, from userid 40) id 65BE28D0010; Fri, 3 Jul 2020 02:35:52 -0400 (EDT) X-Delivered-To: int-list-linux-mm@kvack.org Received: by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix, from userid 63042) id 54B6B8D004B; Fri, 3 Jul 2020 02:35:52 -0400 (EDT) X-Delivered-To: linux-mm@kvack.org Received: from forelay.hostedemail.com (smtprelay0189.hostedemail.com [216.40.44.189]) by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3B8598D0010 for ; Fri, 3 Jul 2020 02:35:52 -0400 (EDT) Received: from smtpin23.hostedemail.com (10.5.19.251.rfc1918.com [10.5.19.251]) by forelay05.hostedemail.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id F3CF3181AC9C6 for ; Fri, 3 Jul 2020 06:35:51 +0000 (UTC) X-FDA: 76995804102.23.badge23_3d13ea526e8f Received: from filter.hostedemail.com (10.5.16.251.rfc1918.com [10.5.16.251]) by smtpin23.hostedemail.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id C462237606 for ; Fri, 3 Jul 2020 06:35:51 +0000 (UTC) X-HE-Tag: badge23_3d13ea526e8f X-Filterd-Recvd-Size: 3199 Received: from mail-ej1-f50.google.com (mail-ej1-f50.google.com [209.85.218.50]) by imf19.hostedemail.com (Postfix) with ESMTP for ; Fri, 3 Jul 2020 06:35:51 +0000 (UTC) Received: by mail-ej1-f50.google.com with SMTP id o18so28569998eje.7 for ; Thu, 02 Jul 2020 23:35:51 -0700 (PDT) X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:date:from:to:cc:subject:message-id:references :mime-version:content-disposition:in-reply-to; bh=NojDtPHgyU04BZgerYd3+yccFVPzYnZ7F9ygI7w4DNc=; b=i3zG8p5wEV77TJY2UNkB1klrn3GQjXGVJEpMn0BH82ySJPnNjw13kpxqNQnFOh3Zd6 joWFHw/8gOYMEH23YtBOk74eLOQh61OLDug/O1qC+hYqsJx2830Q8CE28MQxxhYEOvwF NL6vsjTFFT8CURlRAWQdXPbvOub9LJJi/xjRWG0hVD47/F1af7sWNFTsD+gI0ndXlmMH /DlrYcQyecE1X405yxJwTjYmPe8MY1/P3r75mqI/DDLxXOMmO9DqZaN/ZXQjN2z36qW/ wjV4PSMZ3Io7VXdzn500/zKvBClTBJKeXnMNoio2TSYqo6vzZXgC8Q8n4qvU0h0Vuujo Cpzw== X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM530hNjYukZ1mPTSK7Ih62K4FCgz5UANQ+s4mZcuBNEFR5VMRux+c 2zHmV3ZHulq6cMjjw1goawE= X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJwihp/EUddRgogAcW9jNPLdXKXMVfUNhqWuG6Q0n58p0Pz12bOw5FOZ3ev6WXaFzNeayEZexQ== X-Received: by 2002:a17:906:71d4:: with SMTP id i20mr32649859ejk.533.1593758150250; Thu, 02 Jul 2020 23:35:50 -0700 (PDT) Received: from localhost (ip-37-188-168-3.eurotel.cz. [37.188.168.3]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id b11sm11620695edw.76.2020.07.02.23.35.48 (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 bits=256/256); Thu, 02 Jul 2020 23:35:49 -0700 (PDT) Date: Fri, 3 Jul 2020 08:35:48 +0200 From: Michal Hocko To: Shakeel Butt Cc: Johannes Weiner , Roman Gushchin , Yang Shi , David Rientjes , Greg Thelen , Andrew Morton , linux-mm@kvack.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, cgroups@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [RFC PROPOSAL] memcg: per-memcg user space reclaim interface Message-ID: <20200703063548.GM18446@dhcp22.suse.cz> References: <20200702152222.2630760-1-shakeelb@google.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20200702152222.2630760-1-shakeelb@google.com> X-Rspamd-Queue-Id: C462237606 X-Spamd-Result: default: False [0.00 / 100.00] X-Rspamd-Server: rspam04 X-Bogosity: Ham, tests=bogofilter, spamicity=0.000000, version=1.2.4 Sender: owner-linux-mm@kvack.org Precedence: bulk X-Loop: owner-majordomo@kvack.org List-ID: On Thu 02-07-20 08:22:22, Shakeel Butt wrote: [...] > Interface options: > ------------------ > > 1) memcg interface e.g. 'echo 10M > memory.reclaim' > > + simple > + can be extended to target specific type of memory (anon, file, kmem). > - most probably restricted to cgroup v2. > > 2) fadvise(PAGEOUT) on cgroup_dir_fd > > + more general and applicable to other FSes (actually we are using > something similar for tmpfs). > + can be extended in future to just age the LRUs instead of reclaim or > some new use cases. Could you explain why memory.high as an interface to trigger pro-active memory reclaim is not sufficient. Also memory.low limit to protect latency sensitve workloads? -- Michal Hocko SUSE Labs