Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1758570Ab1E0ABb (ORCPT ); Thu, 26 May 2011 20:01:31 -0400 Received: from fgwmail6.fujitsu.co.jp ([192.51.44.36]:51739 "EHLO fgwmail6.fujitsu.co.jp" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1756405Ab1E0AB3 (ORCPT ); Thu, 26 May 2011 20:01:29 -0400 X-SecurityPolicyCheck-FJ: OK by FujitsuOutboundMailChecker v1.3.1 Date: Fri, 27 May 2011 08:54:40 +0900 From: KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki To: Andrew Morton Cc: Daisuke Nishimura , Ying Han , "linux-mm@kvack.org" , "linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" , "balbir@linux.vnet.ibm.com" Subject: Re: [PATCHv4] memcg: reclaim memory from node in round-robin Message-Id: <20110527085440.71035539.kamezawa.hiroyu@jp.fujitsu.com> In-Reply-To: <20110526125207.e02e5775.akpm@linux-foundation.org> References: <20110427165120.a60c6609.kamezawa.hiroyu@jp.fujitsu.com> <20110428093513.5a6970c0.kamezawa.hiroyu@jp.fujitsu.com> <20110428103705.a284df87.nishimura@mxp.nes.nec.co.jp> <20110428104912.6f86b2ee.kamezawa.hiroyu@jp.fujitsu.com> <20110504142623.8aa3bddb.akpm@linux-foundation.org> <20110506151302.a7256987.kamezawa.hiroyu@jp.fujitsu.com> <20110526125207.e02e5775.akpm@linux-foundation.org> Organization: FUJITSU Co. LTD. X-Mailer: Sylpheed 3.1.0 (GTK+ 2.10.14; i686-pc-mingw32) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 2914 Lines: 74 On Thu, 26 May 2011 12:52:07 -0700 Andrew Morton wrote: > On Fri, 6 May 2011 15:13:02 +0900 > KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki wrote: > > > > It would be much better to work out the optimum time at which to rotate > > > the index via some deterministic means. > > > > > > If we can't think of a way of doing that then we should at least pace > > > the rotation frequency via something saner than wall-time. Such as > > > number-of-pages-scanned. > > > > > > > > > What I think now is using reclaim_stat or usigng some fairness based on > > the ratio of inactive file caches. We can calculate the total sum of > > recalaim_stat which gives us a scan_ratio for a whole memcg. And we can > > calculate LRU rotate/scan ratio per node. If rotate/scan ratio is small, > > it will be a good candidate of reclaim target. Hmm, > > > > - check which memory(anon or file) should be scanned. > > (If file is too small, rotate/scan ratio of file is meaningless.) > > - check rotate/scan ratio of each nodes. > > - calculate weights for each nodes (by some logic ?) > > - give a fair scan w.r.t node's weight. > > > > Hmm, I'll have a study on this. > > How's the study coming along ;) > > I'll send this in to Linus today, but I'll feel grumpy while doing so. > We really should do something smarter here - the magic constant will > basically always be suboptimal for everyone and we end up tweaking its > value (if we don't, then the feature just wasn't valuable in the first > place) and then we add a tunable and then people try to tweak the > default setting of the tunable and then I deride them for not setting > the tunable in initscripts and then we have to maintain the stupid > tunable after we've changed the internal implementation and it's all > basically screwed up. > > How to we automatically determine the optimum time at which to rotate, > at runtime? > Ah, I think I should check it after dirty page accounting comes...because ratio of dirty pages is an important information.. Ok, what I think now is just comparing the number of INACTIVE_FILE or the number of FILE CACHES per node. I think we can periodically update per-node and total amount of file caches and we can record per-node node-file-cache * 100/ total-file cache information into memcg's per-node structure. Then, I think we can do some scheduling like lottery scheduling, a scan proportional to the ratio of file caches in the memcg. If it's better to check INACTIVE_ANON, I think swappiness can be used in above calcuration. But yes, I or someone may be able to think of something much better. Thanks, -Kame -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/