All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Michal Hocko <mhocko@suse.com>
To: CGEL <cgel.zte@gmail.com>
Cc: akpm@linux-foundation.org, hannes@cmpxchg.org,
	willy@infradead.org, shy828301@gmail.com,
	roman.gushchin@linux.dev, shakeelb@google.com,
	linmiaohe@huawei.com, william.kucharski@oracle.com,
	peterx@redhat.com, hughd@google.com, vbabka@suse.cz,
	songmuchun@bytedance.com, surenb@google.com,
	linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-mm@kvack.org,
	cgroups@vger.kernel.org, Yang Yang <yang.yang29@zte.com.cn>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] mm/memcg: support control THP behaviour in cgroup
Date: Mon, 9 May 2022 12:00:28 +0200	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <YnjmPAToTR0C5o8x@dhcp22.suse.cz> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <6275d3e7.1c69fb81.1d62.4504@mx.google.com>

On Sat 07-05-22 02:05:25, CGEL wrote:
[...]
> If there are many containers to run on one host, and some of them have high
> performance requirements, administrator could turn on thp for them:
> # docker run -it --thp-enabled=always
> Then all the processes in those containers will always use thp.
> While other containers turn off thp by:
> # docker run -it --thp-enabled=never

I do not know. The THP config space is already too confusing and complex
and this just adds on top. E.g. is the behavior of the knob
hierarchical? What is the policy if parent memcg says madivise while
child says always? How does the per-application configuration aligns
with all that (e.g. memcg policy madivise but application says never via
prctl while still uses some madvised - e.g. via library).

> By doing this we could promote important containers's performance with less
> footprint of thp.

Do we really want to provide something like THP based QoS? To me it
sounds like a bad idea and if the justification is "it might be useful"
then I would say no. So you really need to come with a very good usecase
to promote this further.
-- 
Michal Hocko
SUSE Labs

WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Michal Hocko <mhocko-IBi9RG/b67k@public.gmane.org>
To: CGEL <cgel.zte-Re5JQEeQqe8AvxtiuMwx3w@public.gmane.org>
Cc: akpm-de/tnXTf+JLsfHDXvbKv3WD2FQJk+8+b@public.gmane.org,
	hannes-druUgvl0LCNAfugRpC6u6w@public.gmane.org,
	willy-wEGCiKHe2LqWVfeAwA7xHQ@public.gmane.org,
	shy828301-Re5JQEeQqe8AvxtiuMwx3w@public.gmane.org,
	roman.gushchin-fxUVXftIFDnyG1zEObXtfA@public.gmane.org,
	shakeelb-hpIqsD4AKlfQT0dZR+AlfA@public.gmane.org,
	linmiaohe-hv44wF8Li93QT0dZR+AlfA@public.gmane.org,
	william.kucharski-QHcLZuEGTsvQT0dZR+AlfA@public.gmane.org,
	peterx-H+wXaHxf7aLQT0dZR+AlfA@public.gmane.org,
	hughd-hpIqsD4AKlfQT0dZR+AlfA@public.gmane.org,
	vbabka-AlSwsSmVLrQ@public.gmane.org,
	songmuchun-EC8Uxl6Npydl57MIdRCFDg@public.gmane.org,
	surenb-hpIqsD4AKlfQT0dZR+AlfA@public.gmane.org,
	linux-kernel-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org,
	linux-mm-Bw31MaZKKs3YtjvyW6yDsg@public.gmane.org,
	cgroups-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org,
	Yang Yang <yang.yang29-Th6q7B73Y6EnDS1+zs4M5A@public.gmane.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] mm/memcg: support control THP behaviour in cgroup
Date: Mon, 9 May 2022 12:00:28 +0200	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <YnjmPAToTR0C5o8x@dhcp22.suse.cz> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <6275d3e7.1c69fb81.1d62.4504-ATjtLOhZ0NVl57MIdRCFDg@public.gmane.org>

On Sat 07-05-22 02:05:25, CGEL wrote:
[...]
> If there are many containers to run on one host, and some of them have high
> performance requirements, administrator could turn on thp for them:
> # docker run -it --thp-enabled=always
> Then all the processes in those containers will always use thp.
> While other containers turn off thp by:
> # docker run -it --thp-enabled=never

I do not know. The THP config space is already too confusing and complex
and this just adds on top. E.g. is the behavior of the knob
hierarchical? What is the policy if parent memcg says madivise while
child says always? How does the per-application configuration aligns
with all that (e.g. memcg policy madivise but application says never via
prctl while still uses some madvised - e.g. via library).

> By doing this we could promote important containers's performance with less
> footprint of thp.

Do we really want to provide something like THP based QoS? To me it
sounds like a bad idea and if the justification is "it might be useful"
then I would say no. So you really need to come with a very good usecase
to promote this further.
-- 
Michal Hocko
SUSE Labs

  reply	other threads:[~2022-05-09 10:17 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 47+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2022-05-05  3:38 [PATCH] mm/memcg: support control THP behaviour in cgroup cgel.zte
2022-05-05  3:38 ` cgel.zte-Re5JQEeQqe8AvxtiuMwx3w
2022-05-05 12:49 ` kernel test robot
2022-05-05 12:49   ` kernel test robot
2022-05-05 13:31 ` kernel test robot
2022-05-05 13:31   ` kernel test robot
2022-05-05 16:09 ` kernel test robot
2022-05-05 16:09   ` kernel test robot
2022-05-06 13:41 ` Michal Hocko
2022-05-06 13:41   ` Michal Hocko
2022-05-07  2:05   ` CGEL
2022-05-07  2:05     ` CGEL
2022-05-09 10:00     ` Michal Hocko [this message]
2022-05-09 10:00       ` Michal Hocko
2022-05-09 11:26       ` CGEL
2022-05-09 11:26         ` CGEL
2022-05-09 11:48         ` Michal Hocko
2022-05-09 11:48           ` Michal Hocko
2022-05-10  1:43           ` CGEL
2022-05-10  1:43             ` CGEL
2022-05-10 10:00             ` Michal Hocko
2022-05-10 10:00               ` Michal Hocko
2022-05-10 11:52               ` CGEL
2022-05-10 11:52                 ` CGEL
2022-05-10 13:36                 ` Michal Hocko
2022-05-10 13:36                   ` Michal Hocko
2022-05-11  1:59                   ` CGEL
2022-05-11  1:59                     ` CGEL
2022-05-11  7:21                     ` Michal Hocko
2022-05-11  7:21                       ` Michal Hocko
2022-05-11  9:47                       ` CGEL
2022-05-18  5:58                   ` CGEL
2022-05-18  5:58                     ` CGEL
2022-05-10 19:34             ` Yang Shi
2022-05-10 19:34               ` Yang Shi
2022-05-11  2:19               ` CGEL
2022-05-11  2:19                 ` CGEL
2022-05-11  2:47                 ` Shakeel Butt
2022-05-11  2:47                   ` Shakeel Butt
2022-05-11  3:11                   ` Roman Gushchin
2022-05-11  3:11                     ` Roman Gushchin
2022-05-11  3:31                     ` CGEL
2022-05-11  3:31                       ` CGEL
2022-05-18  8:14                       ` Balbir Singh
2022-05-18  8:14                         ` Balbir Singh
2022-05-11  3:17                   ` CGEL
2022-05-11  3:17                     ` CGEL

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=YnjmPAToTR0C5o8x@dhcp22.suse.cz \
    --to=mhocko@suse.com \
    --cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
    --cc=cgel.zte@gmail.com \
    --cc=cgroups@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=hannes@cmpxchg.org \
    --cc=hughd@google.com \
    --cc=linmiaohe@huawei.com \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
    --cc=peterx@redhat.com \
    --cc=roman.gushchin@linux.dev \
    --cc=shakeelb@google.com \
    --cc=shy828301@gmail.com \
    --cc=songmuchun@bytedance.com \
    --cc=surenb@google.com \
    --cc=vbabka@suse.cz \
    --cc=william.kucharski@oracle.com \
    --cc=willy@infradead.org \
    --cc=yang.yang29@zte.com.cn \
    /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.