From: Shakeel Butt <shakeel.butt@linux.dev>
To: Yosry Ahmed <yosryahmed@google.com>
Cc: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
Johannes Weiner <hannes@cmpxchg.org>,
Michal Hocko <mhocko@kernel.org>,
Roman Gushchin <roman.gushchin@linux.dev>,
Muchun Song <muchun.song@linux.dev>,
Greg Thelen <gthelen@google.com>,
Facebook Kernel Team <kernel-team@meta.com>,
linux-mm@kvack.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH] memcg: expose children memory usage for root
Date: Fri, 26 Jul 2024 08:48:27 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <lhlfj2keag2ciurt7v76d4nhyk5k5czrkvuocbgxkeep6zgwgo@ifjthvn5osvr> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CAJD7tkaR3s6fzRZWdvMvfSRBRaozSj7d2pH5HUjtbuOW+RROFA@mail.gmail.com>
On Thu, Jul 25, 2024 at 04:20:45PM GMT, Yosry Ahmed wrote:
> On Mon, Jul 22, 2024 at 3:53 PM Shakeel Butt <shakeel.butt@linux.dev> wrote:
> >
> > Linux kernel does not expose memory.current on the root memcg and there
> > are applications which have to traverse all the top level memcgs to
> > calculate the total memory charged in the system. This is more expensive
> > (directory traversal and multiple open and reads) and is racy on a busy
> > machine. As the kernel already have the needed information i.e. root's
> > memory.current, why not expose that?
> >
> > However root's memory.current will have a different semantics than the
> > non-root's memory.current as the kernel skips the charging for root, so
> > maybe it is better to have a different named interface for the root.
> > Something like memory.children_usage only for root memcg.
> >
> > Now there is still a question that why the kernel does not expose
> > memory.current for the root. The historical reason was that the memcg
> > charging was expensice and to provide the users to bypass the memcg
> > charging by letting them run in the root. However do we still want to
> > have this exception today? What is stopping us to start charging the
> > root memcg as well. Of course the root will not have limits but the
> > allocations will go through memcg charging and then the memory.current
> > of root and non-root will have the same semantics.
> >
> > This is an RFC to start a discussion on memcg charging for root.
>
> I vaguely remember when running some netperf tests (tcp_rr?) in a
> cgroup that the performance decreases considerably with every level
> down the hierarchy. I am assuming that charging was a part of the
> reason. If that's the case, charging the root will be similar to
> moving all workloads one level down the hierarchy in terms of charging
> overhead.
No, the workloads running in non-root memcgs will not see any
difference. Only the workloads running in root will see charging
overhead.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2024-07-26 15:48 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 12+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2024-07-22 22:53 Shakeel Butt
2024-07-25 23:12 ` T.J. Mercier
2024-07-26 15:46 ` Shakeel Butt
2024-07-26 16:46 ` T.J. Mercier
2024-07-25 23:20 ` Yosry Ahmed
2024-07-26 15:48 ` Shakeel Butt [this message]
2024-07-26 16:25 ` Yosry Ahmed
2024-07-26 16:50 ` T.J. Mercier
2024-07-26 17:18 ` Shakeel Butt
2024-07-26 17:30 ` Shakeel Butt
2024-07-26 17:43 ` Yosry Ahmed
2024-07-26 18:16 ` Shakeel Butt
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=lhlfj2keag2ciurt7v76d4nhyk5k5czrkvuocbgxkeep6zgwgo@ifjthvn5osvr \
--to=shakeel.butt@linux.dev \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=gthelen@google.com \
--cc=hannes@cmpxchg.org \
--cc=kernel-team@meta.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
--cc=mhocko@kernel.org \
--cc=muchun.song@linux.dev \
--cc=roman.gushchin@linux.dev \
--cc=yosryahmed@google.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox