All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Michal Hocko <mhocko@kernel.org>
To: Johannes Weiner <hannes@cmpxchg.org>
Cc: Vladimir Davydov <vdavydov@virtuozzo.com>,
	Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
	linux-mm@kvack.org, cgroups@vger.kernel.org,
	linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, kernel-team@fb.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH 7/8] mm: memcontrol: account "kmem" consumers in cgroup2 memory controller
Date: Thu, 10 Dec 2015 17:25:48 +0100	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20151210162548.GC11778@dhcp22.suse.cz> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20151210151627.GB1431@cmpxchg.org>

On Thu 10-12-15 10:16:27, Johannes Weiner wrote:
> On Thu, Dec 10, 2015 at 02:28:33PM +0100, Michal Hocko wrote:
> > On Wed 09-12-15 14:30:38, Vladimir Davydov wrote:
> > > From: Vladimir Davydov <vdavydov@virtuozzo.com>
> > > Subject: [PATCH] mm: memcontrol: allow to disable kmem accounting for cgroup2
> > > 
> > > Kmem accounting might incur overhead that some users can't put up with.
> > > Besides, the implementation is still considered unstable. So let's
> > > provide a way to disable it for those users who aren't happy with it.
> > 
> > Yes there will be users who do not want to pay an additional overhead
> > and still accoplish what they need.
> > I haven't measured the overhead lately - especially after the opt-out ->
> > opt-in change so it might be much lower than my previous ~5% for kbuild
> > load.
> 
> I think switching from accounting *all* slab allocations to accounting
> a list of, what, less than 20 select slabs, counts as a change
> significant enough to entirely invalidate those measurements and never
> bring up that number again in the context of kmem cost, don't you think?

Yes, as I've said the numbers are expected to be much lower. That is
one of the reasons I have acknowledged kmem enabled as a reasonable
default.  There will always be _special_ loads where numbers might look
differently, though, and having a disabling knob is a reasonable thing
to offer with a minimum maintenance overhead. And this is the argument
for the inclusion of the patch from Vladimir.

-- 
Michal Hocko
SUSE Labs

WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Michal Hocko <mhocko@kernel.org>
To: Johannes Weiner <hannes@cmpxchg.org>
Cc: Vladimir Davydov <vdavydov@virtuozzo.com>,
	Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
	linux-mm@kvack.org, cgroups@vger.kernel.org,
	linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, kernel-team@fb.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH 7/8] mm: memcontrol: account "kmem" consumers in cgroup2 memory controller
Date: Thu, 10 Dec 2015 17:25:48 +0100	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20151210162548.GC11778@dhcp22.suse.cz> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20151210151627.GB1431@cmpxchg.org>

On Thu 10-12-15 10:16:27, Johannes Weiner wrote:
> On Thu, Dec 10, 2015 at 02:28:33PM +0100, Michal Hocko wrote:
> > On Wed 09-12-15 14:30:38, Vladimir Davydov wrote:
> > > From: Vladimir Davydov <vdavydov@virtuozzo.com>
> > > Subject: [PATCH] mm: memcontrol: allow to disable kmem accounting for cgroup2
> > > 
> > > Kmem accounting might incur overhead that some users can't put up with.
> > > Besides, the implementation is still considered unstable. So let's
> > > provide a way to disable it for those users who aren't happy with it.
> > 
> > Yes there will be users who do not want to pay an additional overhead
> > and still accoplish what they need.
> > I haven't measured the overhead lately - especially after the opt-out ->
> > opt-in change so it might be much lower than my previous ~5% for kbuild
> > load.
> 
> I think switching from accounting *all* slab allocations to accounting
> a list of, what, less than 20 select slabs, counts as a change
> significant enough to entirely invalidate those measurements and never
> bring up that number again in the context of kmem cost, don't you think?

Yes, as I've said the numbers are expected to be much lower. That is
one of the reasons I have acknowledged kmem enabled as a reasonable
default.  There will always be _special_ loads where numbers might look
differently, though, and having a disabling knob is a reasonable thing
to offer with a minimum maintenance overhead. And this is the argument
for the inclusion of the patch from Vladimir.

-- 
Michal Hocko
SUSE Labs

--
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: <a href=mailto:"dont@kvack.org"> email@kvack.org </a>

WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Michal Hocko <mhocko-DgEjT+Ai2ygdnm+yROfE0A@public.gmane.org>
To: Johannes Weiner <hannes-druUgvl0LCNAfugRpC6u6w@public.gmane.org>
Cc: Vladimir Davydov
	<vdavydov-5HdwGun5lf+gSpxsJD1C4w@public.gmane.org>,
	Andrew Morton
	<akpm-de/tnXTf+JLsfHDXvbKv3WD2FQJk+8+b@public.gmane.org>,
	linux-mm-Bw31MaZKKs3YtjvyW6yDsg@public.gmane.org,
	cgroups-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org,
	linux-kernel-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org,
	kernel-team-b10kYP2dOMg@public.gmane.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 7/8] mm: memcontrol: account "kmem" consumers in cgroup2 memory controller
Date: Thu, 10 Dec 2015 17:25:48 +0100	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20151210162548.GC11778@dhcp22.suse.cz> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20151210151627.GB1431-druUgvl0LCNAfugRpC6u6w@public.gmane.org>

On Thu 10-12-15 10:16:27, Johannes Weiner wrote:
> On Thu, Dec 10, 2015 at 02:28:33PM +0100, Michal Hocko wrote:
> > On Wed 09-12-15 14:30:38, Vladimir Davydov wrote:
> > > From: Vladimir Davydov <vdavydov-5HdwGun5lf+gSpxsJD1C4w@public.gmane.org>
> > > Subject: [PATCH] mm: memcontrol: allow to disable kmem accounting for cgroup2
> > > 
> > > Kmem accounting might incur overhead that some users can't put up with.
> > > Besides, the implementation is still considered unstable. So let's
> > > provide a way to disable it for those users who aren't happy with it.
> > 
> > Yes there will be users who do not want to pay an additional overhead
> > and still accoplish what they need.
> > I haven't measured the overhead lately - especially after the opt-out ->
> > opt-in change so it might be much lower than my previous ~5% for kbuild
> > load.
> 
> I think switching from accounting *all* slab allocations to accounting
> a list of, what, less than 20 select slabs, counts as a change
> significant enough to entirely invalidate those measurements and never
> bring up that number again in the context of kmem cost, don't you think?

Yes, as I've said the numbers are expected to be much lower. That is
one of the reasons I have acknowledged kmem enabled as a reasonable
default.  There will always be _special_ loads where numbers might look
differently, though, and having a disabling knob is a reasonable thing
to offer with a minimum maintenance overhead. And this is the argument
for the inclusion of the patch from Vladimir.

-- 
Michal Hocko
SUSE Labs

  reply	other threads:[~2015-12-10 16:25 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 79+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2015-12-08 18:34 [PATCH 0/8] mm: memcontrol: account "kmem" in cgroup2 Johannes Weiner
2015-12-08 18:34 ` Johannes Weiner
2015-12-08 18:34 ` Johannes Weiner
2015-12-08 18:34 ` [PATCH 1/8] mm: memcontrol: drop unused @css argument in memcg_init_kmem Johannes Weiner
2015-12-08 18:34   ` Johannes Weiner
2015-12-09  9:01   ` Vladimir Davydov
2015-12-09  9:01     ` Vladimir Davydov
2015-12-09  9:01     ` Vladimir Davydov
2015-12-10 12:37   ` Michal Hocko
2015-12-10 12:37     ` Michal Hocko
2015-12-10 12:37     ` Michal Hocko
2015-12-08 18:34 ` [PATCH 2/8] mm: memcontrol: remove double kmem page_counter init Johannes Weiner
2015-12-08 18:34   ` Johannes Weiner
2015-12-09  9:05   ` Vladimir Davydov
2015-12-09  9:05     ` Vladimir Davydov
2015-12-10 12:40   ` Michal Hocko
2015-12-10 12:40     ` Michal Hocko
2015-12-10 12:40     ` Michal Hocko
2015-12-08 18:34 ` [PATCH 3/8] mm: memcontrol: give the kmem states more descriptive names Johannes Weiner
2015-12-08 18:34   ` Johannes Weiner
2015-12-09  9:10   ` Vladimir Davydov
2015-12-09  9:10     ` Vladimir Davydov
2015-12-09  9:10     ` Vladimir Davydov
2015-12-10 12:47   ` Michal Hocko
2015-12-10 12:47     ` Michal Hocko
2015-12-08 18:34 ` [PATCH 4/8] mm: memcontrol: group kmem init and exit functions together Johannes Weiner
2015-12-08 18:34   ` Johannes Weiner
2015-12-09  9:14   ` Vladimir Davydov
2015-12-09  9:14     ` Vladimir Davydov
2015-12-09  9:14     ` Vladimir Davydov
2015-12-10 12:56   ` Michal Hocko
2015-12-10 12:56     ` Michal Hocko
2015-12-08 18:34 ` [PATCH 5/8] mm: memcontrol: separate kmem code from legacy tcp accounting code Johannes Weiner
2015-12-08 18:34   ` Johannes Weiner
2015-12-09  9:23   ` Vladimir Davydov
2015-12-09  9:23     ` Vladimir Davydov
2015-12-09  9:23     ` Vladimir Davydov
2015-12-10 12:59   ` Michal Hocko
2015-12-10 12:59     ` Michal Hocko
2015-12-10 12:59     ` Michal Hocko
2015-12-08 18:34 ` [PATCH 6/8] mm: memcontrol: move kmem accounting code to CONFIG_MEMCG Johannes Weiner
2015-12-08 18:34   ` Johannes Weiner
2015-12-09  9:32   ` Vladimir Davydov
2015-12-09  9:32     ` Vladimir Davydov
2015-12-09  9:32     ` Vladimir Davydov
2015-12-10 13:17   ` Michal Hocko
2015-12-10 13:17     ` Michal Hocko
2015-12-10 14:00     ` Johannes Weiner
2015-12-10 14:00       ` Johannes Weiner
2015-12-10 14:00       ` Johannes Weiner
2015-12-10 20:22   ` [PATCH 6/8 v2] " Johannes Weiner
2015-12-10 20:22     ` Johannes Weiner
2015-12-10 20:22     ` Johannes Weiner
2015-12-10 20:50     ` Johannes Weiner
2015-12-10 20:50       ` Johannes Weiner
2015-12-10 20:50       ` Johannes Weiner
2015-12-08 18:34 ` [PATCH 7/8] mm: memcontrol: account "kmem" consumers in cgroup2 memory controller Johannes Weiner
2015-12-08 18:34   ` Johannes Weiner
2015-12-09 11:30   ` Vladimir Davydov
2015-12-09 11:30     ` Vladimir Davydov
2015-12-09 11:30     ` Vladimir Davydov
2015-12-09 14:32     ` Johannes Weiner
2015-12-09 14:32       ` Johannes Weiner
2015-12-09 14:32       ` Johannes Weiner
2015-12-10 13:28     ` Michal Hocko
2015-12-10 13:28       ` Michal Hocko
2015-12-10 13:28       ` Michal Hocko
2015-12-10 15:16       ` Johannes Weiner
2015-12-10 15:16         ` Johannes Weiner
2015-12-10 16:25         ` Michal Hocko [this message]
2015-12-10 16:25           ` Michal Hocko
2015-12-10 16:25           ` Michal Hocko
2015-12-10 14:21   ` Michal Hocko
2015-12-10 14:21     ` Michal Hocko
2015-12-08 18:34 ` [PATCH 8/8] mm: memcontrol: introduce CONFIG_MEMCG_LEGACY_KMEM Johannes Weiner
2015-12-08 18:34   ` Johannes Weiner
2015-12-09 11:31   ` Vladimir Davydov
2015-12-09 11:31     ` Vladimir Davydov
2015-12-09 11:31     ` Vladimir Davydov

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=20151210162548.GC11778@dhcp22.suse.cz \
    --to=mhocko@kernel.org \
    --cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
    --cc=cgroups@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=hannes@cmpxchg.org \
    --cc=kernel-team@fb.com \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
    --cc=vdavydov@virtuozzo.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 an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.