Re: [RFC PATCH] mm: Add reclaim type to memory.reclaim

[Yafang Shao <laoar.shao@gmail.com>]

On Tue, Feb 27, 2024 at 9:17 PM Michal Hocko <mhocko@suse.com> wrote:
>
> On Tue 27-02-24 20:12:27, Yafang Shao wrote:
> > On Tue, Feb 27, 2024 at 8:09 PM Yafang Shao <laoar.shao@gmail.com> wrote:
> [...]
> > > > If that's the case, why was slabs info initially exposed through
> > > > /proc/slabinfo?
>
> because that helps to better understand the memory consumption by slab
> consumers.
>
> > > > Isn't that level of detail considered a kernel
> > > > implementation detail? Currently, users can identify which slab is
> > > > consuming the most memory but lack the ability to take action based on
> > > > that information. This suggests a flaw in the kernel implementation.
>
> I disgree!
>
> > > BTW, we even expose more detailed kernel implementation details
> > > through /sys/kernel/slab.
> > > That is really confusing...
> >
> > There is even a /sys/kernel/slab/dentry/shrink ....
> > oh please...
>
> We also have /proc/sys/vm/drop_caches and we have learned those are
> really terrible interfaces and we have good reasons to not replicate
> those into memcg interfaces. Using bad interfaces as an example is not
> the way argue for new ones.

And then we introduce a similar memory.reclaim......

-- 
Regards
Yafang