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=-5.8 required=3.0 tests=BAYES_00,DKIMWL_WL_HIGH, DKIM_SIGNED,DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS, MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS,URIBL_BLOCKED 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 DFD9BC56202 for ; Thu, 26 Nov 2020 11:02:29 +0000 (UTC) Received: from kanga.kvack.org (kanga.kvack.org [205.233.56.17]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 428A120DD4 for ; Thu, 26 Nov 2020 11:02:29 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=redhat.com header.i=@redhat.com header.b="bg5S6WP+" DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.3.2 mail.kernel.org 428A120DD4 Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dmarc=fail (p=none dis=none) header.from=redhat.com Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=owner-linux-mm@kvack.org Received: by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix) id BBBF76B0072; Thu, 26 Nov 2020 06:02:28 -0500 (EST) Received: by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix, from userid 40) id B92536B0073; Thu, 26 Nov 2020 06:02:28 -0500 (EST) X-Delivered-To: int-list-linux-mm@kvack.org Received: by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix, from userid 63042) id AAA276B0074; Thu, 26 Nov 2020 06:02:28 -0500 (EST) X-Delivered-To: linux-mm@kvack.org Received: from forelay.hostedemail.com (smtprelay0240.hostedemail.com [216.40.44.240]) by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 94CBD6B0072 for ; Thu, 26 Nov 2020 06:02:28 -0500 (EST) Received: from smtpin15.hostedemail.com (10.5.19.251.rfc1918.com [10.5.19.251]) by forelay04.hostedemail.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5D6E21EF1 for ; Thu, 26 Nov 2020 11:02:28 +0000 (UTC) X-FDA: 77526280776.15.route96_121530d2737e Received: from filter.hostedemail.com (10.5.16.251.rfc1918.com [10.5.16.251]) by smtpin15.hostedemail.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 193491814B0C8 for ; Thu, 26 Nov 2020 11:02:28 +0000 (UTC) X-HE-Tag: route96_121530d2737e X-Filterd-Recvd-Size: 5258 Received: from us-smtp-delivery-124.mimecast.com (us-smtp-delivery-124.mimecast.com [216.205.24.124]) by imf21.hostedemail.com (Postfix) with ESMTP for ; Thu, 26 Nov 2020 11:02:27 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=redhat.com; s=mimecast20190719; t=1606388546; h=from:from:reply-to:subject:subject:date:date:message-id:message-id: to:to:cc:cc:mime-version:mime-version:content-type:content-type: in-reply-to:in-reply-to:references:references; bh=8cvGV8OUthTmjmbY5oJ7mRxJLMMwznOKcyuaPUff3ek=; b=bg5S6WP+9j7V0FLtyKFpK01ZmT1q5pjHBwrChpBKBNPBiMOBEV11JyKi/dqvAi9/Wmd5FA c99S4v243BenoUKydK+8pLq0d7D14ynLaycwZz+nkoqn5KHveRbSZdVf5gpiTGm2qvVz7K F3fmg0PQr1Dj3hMDlVlrr6uDuKFSsi8= Received: from mail-wr1-f72.google.com (mail-wr1-f72.google.com [209.85.221.72]) (Using TLS) by relay.mimecast.com with ESMTP id us-mta-405-Wuesj-ncOUSFsFTRhk7lfA-1; Thu, 26 Nov 2020 06:02:24 -0500 X-MC-Unique: Wuesj-ncOUSFsFTRhk7lfA-1 Received: by mail-wr1-f72.google.com with SMTP id z13so1085537wrm.19 for ; Thu, 26 Nov 2020 03:02:24 -0800 (PST) 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=8cvGV8OUthTmjmbY5oJ7mRxJLMMwznOKcyuaPUff3ek=; b=hf/4Lfcrhx5+SgTygB6OK0B1MTGPykmwskBlk5dQ2kLayScvTD/oSQUwOi7UUV4iN/ mVU01bhZvHJllxqDp5RFq1VEqCxKWLs7Cne8qYje4wL8we+/rlPcxeWXd172J14epQIO jNfkmFbw01rwBbPbDKCIpHR/K5E6BbThGwgSA43LgMQUL2a5XDBIBNTrfJjYyyH5OANL suAob5ZeKWnBP++Ybo4Jt/s3AE24cSp5E4TcDS575p0RWcB6tCPaTxCK0k4119AJdWIv CbQ8KlfZq8DwEHbmIGXuC4mNuSgWUQORbhoHCrL4tJ7mc3sFm3kMOxK39u6dRcKVWVZY YgHQ== X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM533JZStFB3wh+tvIim4vUAF4KO6Qul5LOXdaQxRCXyB7ukQ9c5/m vBJ7joPxAsnYUUCGTW/fGtH7JTj6ojHuurWxAM77195PoFJX7D0zlAdlqfRFnICt3X/Uaz6fcaD kJEj7j/C3Cw== X-Received: by 2002:adf:a54d:: with SMTP id j13mr3210913wrb.132.1606388543440; Thu, 26 Nov 2020 03:02:23 -0800 (PST) X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJzNurD+B9K0wyu+wLx1//nc60gT6N9gDdwcKceycA0Aw8hI/yIujAcODjNgQftSCd3n2mbAxg== X-Received: by 2002:adf:a54d:: with SMTP id j13mr3210886wrb.132.1606388543257; Thu, 26 Nov 2020 03:02:23 -0800 (PST) Received: from localhost (cpc111767-lutn13-2-0-cust344.9-3.cable.virginm.net. [86.5.41.89]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id y2sm8806139wrn.31.2020.11.26.03.02.21 (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 bits=256/256); Thu, 26 Nov 2020 03:02:21 -0800 (PST) Date: Thu, 26 Nov 2020 11:02:20 +0000 From: Aaron Tomlin To: Michal Hocko Cc: linux-kernel , hannes@cmpxchg.org, vdavydov.dev@gmail.com, Andrew Morton , cgroups@vger.kernel.org, linux-mm Subject: Re: [PATCH] memcg: add support to generate the total count of children from root Message-ID: <20201126110220.k4o6s32er5jy2mdk@ava.usersys.com> X-PGP-Key: http://pgp.mit.edu/pks/lookup?search=atomlin%40redhat.com X-PGP-Fingerprint: 7906 84EB FA8A 9638 8D1E 6E9B E2DE 9658 19CC 77D6 References: <20201124105836.713371-1-atomlin@redhat.com> <20201124112612.GV27488@dhcp22.suse.cz> <20201124133644.GA31550@dhcp22.suse.cz> MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: Authentication-Results: relay.mimecast.com; auth=pass smtp.auth=CUSA124A263 smtp.mailfrom=atomlin@redhat.com X-Mimecast-Spam-Score: 0 X-Mimecast-Originator: redhat.com Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Disposition: inline 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 Tue 2020-11-24 13:47 +0000, Aaron Tomlin wrote: > On Tue, 24 Nov 2020 at 13:36, Michal Hocko wrote: > > This like any other user visible interface would be a much easier sell > > if there was a clear usecase to justify it. I do not see anything > > controversial about exporting such a value but my general take is that > > we are only adding new interface when existing ones are insufficient. A > > performance might be a very good reason but that would really require to > > come with some real life numbers. Michal, > Fair enough and understood. > > At this stage, I unfortunately do not have such supporting data. This was only > useful in an isolated situation. Having said this, I thought that the > aforementioned interface would be helpful to others, in particular, given the > known limitation. Furthermore, I can see that this is already provided via /proc/cgroups (see proc_cgroupstats_show()). As such, another possibility: the proposed interface could reliably produce the difference between the maximum permitted memory-controlled cgroup count and the used count (i.e. the remaining memory cgroup count, from root); albeit, I doubt that this would be particularly useful to others i.e., the use-case would be rather limited. Kind regards, -- Aaron Tomlin