Received: by 2002:a25:8b91:0:0:0:0:0 with SMTP id j17csp18416770ybl; Fri, 3 Jan 2020 01:50:05 -0800 (PST) X-Google-Smtp-Source: APXvYqzsMTcSaY/KUq8AcHDVA+noRboOLkhuHeciEmdbUODYfPNhFCDk8deHvC18/wLEgOAKPoSU X-Received: by 2002:a05:6830:2116:: with SMTP id i22mr101778923otc.0.1578045005505; Fri, 03 Jan 2020 01:50:05 -0800 (PST) ARC-Seal: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; t=1578045005; cv=none; d=google.com; s=arc-20160816; b=C6eWvXMNTnBAeSI2DmLgVhic3ohP5VhRGxK9Xz0UP/M85CgHyWTLTv8i/NKBNDaL+x mdk3BkD8NuJfdhPOT8wY3LRv7/BJ4OqoENx8KQZNeJ5Mm7L7ZOhfRfg/4qqvGarWpsv4 MD3Uzitax8xrc9zesyP/0M5DVN+8mAooD1lZImuQZb6wd1v+3hhzpbenV7az9EaWyjr/ Vr+/Qt193cc/V63gl3pGaD0KejzawV6xYQNrOxRgLdfxHqyosQU5fw3IMadC37jG9RPG wFPHIO9j3yMc9qSPQFTDzxKKjbJbE4oEu9jHcbREXAG1ng7Wxkd1og45efaGazyBDYZH t54A== ARC-Message-Signature: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=google.com; s=arc-20160816; h=list-id:precedence:sender:user-agent:in-reply-to :content-disposition:mime-version:references:message-id:subject:cc :to:from:date; bh=tlmlOnvLj4bmgkz4adNy+NMVkQCKKTGgFUL63ew4lzQ=; b=mchZqQJh44Ea/5wlIxKJt1WtUB2/27G+Faec+hVKwtDUNombBIFVZeHOiOpCJ/OQ0T UUcw9tfUldnUIjzk9VgbAu73mFMLqUccXEKLJXbp5MwpqFb7WG9ib/EIqKusBd+ymquZ Y9AwM2kYb4Wgf56PFEE5weLenod5WeTUxYC02pNGeJmzwjwnOKvgR99yE/P/+Zi6kFVO hKThHRkpKTk9FG9/yzZiE20t461P+U29X/gC3npLif0uaenfVZS1THSrEP661lFs1k4p iBpaBjSrIBgmwA63PgWey+MMyCme03BMuZJUtW+xqqVf7ITCSF1n4P0MGGSXNb8iqY1R Facw== ARC-Authentication-Results: i=1; mx.google.com; spf=pass (google.com: best guess record for domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 209.132.180.67 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org Return-Path: Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org. [209.132.180.67]) by mx.google.com with ESMTP id p62si20128935oig.101.2020.01.03.01.49.52; Fri, 03 Jan 2020 01:50:05 -0800 (PST) Received-SPF: pass (google.com: best guess record for domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 209.132.180.67 as permitted sender) client-ip=209.132.180.67; Authentication-Results: mx.google.com; spf=pass (google.com: best guess record for domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 209.132.180.67 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1727457AbgACJs6 (ORCPT + 99 others); Fri, 3 Jan 2020 04:48:58 -0500 Received: from mx2.suse.de ([195.135.220.15]:57340 "EHLO mx2.suse.de" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1725972AbgACJs6 (ORCPT ); Fri, 3 Jan 2020 04:48:58 -0500 X-Virus-Scanned: by amavisd-new at test-mx.suse.de Received: from relay2.suse.de (unknown [195.135.220.254]) by mx2.suse.de (Postfix) with ESMTP id 062F2AE87; Fri, 3 Jan 2020 09:48:55 +0000 (UTC) Date: Fri, 3 Jan 2020 10:48:54 +0100 From: Michal =?iso-8859-1?Q?Koutn=FD?= To: teawater Cc: Chris Down , Hui Zhu , Johannes Weiner , Michal Hocko , vdavydov.dev@gmail.com, akpm@linux-foundation.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, cgroups@vger.kernel.org, linux-mm@kvack.org Subject: Re: [RFC] memcg: Add swappiness to cgroup2 Message-ID: <20200103094853.GM22847@blackbody.suse.cz> References: <1577252208-32419-1-git-send-email-teawater@gmail.com> <20191225140546.GA311630@chrisdown.name> <6E9887B9-EEF7-406E-90D4-3FAEFE0A505E@linux.alibaba.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha256; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="dzI2QqkSBOAresgT" Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <6E9887B9-EEF7-406E-90D4-3FAEFE0A505E@linux.alibaba.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.10.1 (2018-07-13) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org --dzI2QqkSBOAresgT Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline On Thu, Dec 26, 2019 at 02:56:40PM +0800, teawater wrote: > For example, an application does a lot of file access work in a > memory-constrained environment. > [...] > Both of them are extreme examples. The examples are quite generic. Do cgroup v2 controls really prevent handling such workloads appropriately? Besides that, note that per-cgroup swappiness as used in v1 cannot be simply transferred into v2 because, it's a concept that doesn't take into account cgroup hierarchies (how would parent's swappiness affect children? what would swappiness on inner nodes mean?). HTH, Michal --dzI2QqkSBOAresgT Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc" Content-Description: Digital signature -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- iQIzBAEBCAAdFiEEEoQaUCWq8F2Id1tNia1+riC5qSgFAl4PDgAACgkQia1+riC5 qSgXQQ//fdhyA8EegA3X3Xot5ZkyaIG2xgwbk8ZiiOuhPr2xEmrpBrEf3eC+IBPH /4Iq/kuHKAZEJcOtfJZepJoF9LDQjoAdpqVd21ohGgxxXsCTFnT/et+Z8t/dpaXB gpp6VahkMZxdJ0vBCPhHu46nkpBACbjMzCklzpAaVa1Rz95L8Ob4Eel1e76R7S6n KxLyLxkgdRVV8GeABMS7wf5NljfqAQ/SUCKfjoJYyC58PA3LVsYYke7bXSlMwLay jt1Pb635+2ajdT3LahtR2r9xGFxpL+Rf2WPbJ3MPUl7MQ4HwV0zw4fpqSKtXBeRJ x7oTfUNZfOGXR2Nnm8Tdb2rumnznwhtuFAn3wvwxKOIiT9iS0Ye21KvMQ3hqyeIB ZVDYMT0eUmxpjbZgwMcH9UpCpwT4HyKDLFH57mleTIrBeRjCua6tf4nf4S+RHSc7 VxyH4VEkQgD6M9z/ySQDfRMKU/SBy6UQkxCQ4avrx4igbQL+MENQ/6ntD0Kp4XFJ suj2i9UdOmGzBt5kkJMkGjFN/NuOF/WEf1ZCr3/Sg6g5RzJna/Oh0dEKhhsb8/vp 0ENgmveAUNbtijTby+6xo+6UBoE9HEcnNMu++evdBZRzvXcbnwhVZr84Qyjg15Mq T7S51fMo9A+I+lC0KFOud0hSUTaaPPesnIGs6v2jqlbh/8rKids= =QzSj -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --dzI2QqkSBOAresgT--