Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1758637Ab1FQWE0 (ORCPT ); Fri, 17 Jun 2011 18:04:26 -0400 Received: from smtp-out.google.com ([74.125.121.67]:5561 "EHLO smtp-out.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1757775Ab1FQWEZ convert rfc822-to-8bit (ORCPT ); Fri, 17 Jun 2011 18:04:25 -0400 DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=google.com; s=beta; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to :cc:content-type:content-transfer-encoding; b=sEHpy4ZNRlC2VKokpknZEZuyc2BPPKHID6JVC8hfMRtMQul0W6W31Vegh7Xn86ZoHn LPQQCDViCrUfo18/gy9Q== MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <20110616125314.4f78b1e0.kamezawa.hiroyu@jp.fujitsu.com> References: <20110616124730.d6960b8b.kamezawa.hiroyu@jp.fujitsu.com> <20110616125314.4f78b1e0.kamezawa.hiroyu@jp.fujitsu.com> Date: Fri, 17 Jun 2011 15:04:18 -0700 Message-ID: Subject: Re: [PATCH 3/7] memcg: add memory.scan_stat From: Ying Han To: KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki Cc: "linux-mm@kvack.org" , "linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" , "akpm@linux-foundation.org" , "nishimura@mxp.nes.nec.co.jp" , "bsingharora@gmail.com" , Michal Hocko , "hannes@cmpxchg.org" , Andrew Bresticker Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8BIT X-System-Of-Record: true Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 19099 Lines: 489 On Wed, Jun 15, 2011 at 8:53 PM, KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki wrote: > From e08990dd9ada13cf236bec1ef44b207436434b8e Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 > From: KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki > Date: Wed, 15 Jun 2011 14:11:01 +0900 > Subject: [PATCH 3/7] memcg: add memory.scan_stat > > commit log of commit 0ae5e89 " memcg: count the soft_limit reclaim in..." > says it adds scanning stats to memory.stat file. But it doesn't because > we considered we needed to make a concensus for such new APIs. > > This patch is a trial to add memory.scan_stat. This shows > ?- the number of scanned pages > ?- the number of recleimed pages > ?- the number of elaplsed time (including sleep/pause time) > ?for both of direct/soft reclaim and shrinking caused by changing limit > ?or force_empty. > > The biggest difference with oringinal Ying's one is that this file > can be reset by some write, as > > ?# echo 0 ...../memory.scan_stat > > [kamezawa@bluextal ~]$ cat /cgroup/memory/A/memory.scan_stat > scanned_pages_by_limit 358470 > freed_pages_by_limit 180795 > elapsed_ns_by_limit 21629927 > scanned_pages_by_system 0 > freed_pages_by_system 0 > elapsed_ns_by_system 0 > scanned_pages_by_shrink 76646 > freed_pages_by_shrink 38355 > elappsed_ns_by_shrink 31990670 > total_scanned_pages_by_limit 358470 > total_freed_pages_by_limit 180795 > total_elapsed_ns_by_hierarchical 216299275 > total_scanned_pages_by_system 0 > total_freed_pages_by_system 0 > total_elapsed_ns_by_system 0 > total_scanned_pages_by_shrink 76646 > total_freed_pages_by_shrink 38355 > total_elapsed_ns_by_shrink 31990670 > > total_xxxx is for hierarchy management. > > This will be useful for further memcg developments and need to be > developped before we do some complicated rework on LRU/softlimit > management. Agreed. Actually we are also looking into adding a per-memcg API for adding visibility of page reclaim path. It would be helpful for us to settle w/ the API first. I am not a fan of names, but how about "/dev/cgroup/memory/memory.reclaim_stat" ? > > Now, scan/free/elapsed_by_system is incomplete but future works of > Johannes at el. will fill remaining information and then, we can > look into problems of isolation between memcgs. > > Signed-off-by: KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki > --- > ?Documentation/cgroups/memory.txt | ? 33 +++++++++ > ?include/linux/memcontrol.h ? ? ? | ? 16 ++++ > ?include/linux/swap.h ? ? ? ? ? ? | ? ?6 - > ?mm/memcontrol.c ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ?| ?135 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++-- > ?mm/vmscan.c ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ?| ? 27 ++++++- > ?5 files changed, 199 insertions(+), 18 deletions(-) > > Index: mmotm-0615/Documentation/cgroups/memory.txt > =================================================================== > --- mmotm-0615.orig/Documentation/cgroups/memory.txt > +++ mmotm-0615/Documentation/cgroups/memory.txt > @@ -380,7 +380,7 @@ will be charged as a new owner of it. > > ?5.2 stat file > > -memory.stat file includes following statistics > +5.2.1 memory.stat file includes following statistics > > ?# per-memory cgroup local status > ?cache ? ? ? ? ?- # of bytes of page cache memory. > @@ -438,6 +438,37 @@ Note: > ? ? ? ? file_mapped is accounted only when the memory cgroup is owner of page > ? ? ? ? cache.) > > +5.2.2 memory.scan_stat > + > +memory.scan_stat includes statistics information for memory scanning and > +freeing, reclaiming. The statistics shows memory scanning information since > +memory cgroup creation and can be reset to 0 by writing 0 as > + > + #echo 0 > ../memory.scan_stat > + > +This file contains following statistics. > + > +scanned_pages_by_limit - # of scanned pages at hitting limit. > +freed_pages_by_limit ? - # of freed pages at hitting limit. How those stats different from Johannes's patch? I feel we should keep them into this API instead of memory.stat "pgscan_direct_limit" "pgreclaim_direct_limit" > +elapsed_ns_by_limit ? ?- nano sec of elappsed time at LRU scan at > + ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ?hitting limit.(this includes sleep time.) > + > +scanned_pages_by_system ? ? ? ?- # of scanned pages by the kernel. > + ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? (Now, this value means global memory reclaim > + ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? caused by system memory shortage with a hint > + ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ?of softlimit. "No soft limit" case will be > + ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ?supported in future.) > +freed_pages_by_system ?- # of freed pages by the kernel. The same for the following which I assume the same meaning with: "pgscan_direct_hierarchy" "pgreclaim_direct_hierarchy" > +elapsed_ns_by_system ? - nano sec of elappsed time by kernel. > + > +scanned_pages_by_shrink ? ? ? ?- # of scanned pages by shrinking. > + ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? (i.e. changes of limit, force_empty, etc.) > +freed_pages_by_shrink ?- # of freed pages by shirkining. So those stats are not included in the ones above? --Ying > +elappsed_ns_by_shrink ?- nano sec of elappsed time at shrinking. > + > +total_xxx includes the statistics of children scanning caused by the cgroup. > + > + > ?5.3 swappiness > > ?Similar to /proc/sys/vm/swappiness, but affecting a hierarchy of groups only. > Index: mmotm-0615/include/linux/memcontrol.h > =================================================================== > --- mmotm-0615.orig/include/linux/memcontrol.h > +++ mmotm-0615/include/linux/memcontrol.h > @@ -120,6 +120,22 @@ struct zone_reclaim_stat* > ?mem_cgroup_get_reclaim_stat_from_page(struct page *page); > ?extern void mem_cgroup_print_oom_info(struct mem_cgroup *memcg, > ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ?struct task_struct *p); > +struct memcg_scanrecord { > + ? ? ? struct mem_cgroup *mem; /* scanend memory cgroup */ > + ? ? ? struct mem_cgroup *root; /* scan target hierarchy root */ > + ? ? ? int context; ? ? ? ? ? ?/* scanning context (see memcontrol.c) */ > + ? ? ? unsigned long nr_scanned; /* the number of scanned pages */ > + ? ? ? unsigned long nr_freed; /* the number of freed pages */ > + ? ? ? unsigned long elappsed; /* nsec of time elapsed while scanning */ > +}; > + > +extern unsigned long try_to_free_mem_cgroup_pages(struct mem_cgroup *mem, > + ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? gfp_t gfp_mask, bool noswap, > + ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? struct memcg_scanrecord *rec); > +extern unsigned long mem_cgroup_shrink_node_zone(struct mem_cgroup *mem, > + ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? gfp_t gfp_mask, bool noswap, > + ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? struct zone *zone, > + ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? struct memcg_scanrecord *rec); > > ?#ifdef CONFIG_CGROUP_MEM_RES_CTLR_SWAP > ?extern int do_swap_account; > Index: mmotm-0615/include/linux/swap.h > =================================================================== > --- mmotm-0615.orig/include/linux/swap.h > +++ mmotm-0615/include/linux/swap.h > @@ -253,12 +253,6 @@ static inline void lru_cache_add_file(st > ?/* linux/mm/vmscan.c */ > ?extern unsigned long try_to_free_pages(struct zonelist *zonelist, int order, > ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ?gfp_t gfp_mask, nodemask_t *mask); > -extern unsigned long try_to_free_mem_cgroup_pages(struct mem_cgroup *mem, > - ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? gfp_t gfp_mask, bool noswap); > -extern unsigned long mem_cgroup_shrink_node_zone(struct mem_cgroup *mem, > - ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? gfp_t gfp_mask, bool noswap, > - ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? struct zone *zone, > - ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? unsigned long *nr_scanned); > ?extern int __isolate_lru_page(struct page *page, int mode, int file); > ?extern unsigned long shrink_all_memory(unsigned long nr_pages); > ?extern int vm_swappiness; > Index: mmotm-0615/mm/memcontrol.c > =================================================================== > --- mmotm-0615.orig/mm/memcontrol.c > +++ mmotm-0615/mm/memcontrol.c > @@ -203,6 +203,57 @@ struct mem_cgroup_eventfd_list { > ?static void mem_cgroup_threshold(struct mem_cgroup *mem); > ?static void mem_cgroup_oom_notify(struct mem_cgroup *mem); > > +enum { > + ? ? ? SCAN_BY_LIMIT, > + ? ? ? FREED_BY_LIMIT, > + ? ? ? ELAPSED_BY_LIMIT, > + > + ? ? ? SCAN_BY_SYSTEM, > + ? ? ? FREED_BY_SYSTEM, > + ? ? ? ELAPSED_BY_SYSTEM, > + > + ? ? ? SCAN_BY_SHRINK, > + ? ? ? FREED_BY_SHRINK, > + ? ? ? ELAPSED_BY_SHRINK, > + ? ? ? NR_SCANSTATS, > +}; > +#define __FREED ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ?(1) > +#define ? ? ? ?__ELAPSED ? ? ? (2) > + > +struct scanstat { > + ? ? ? spinlock_t ? ? ?lock; > + ? ? ? unsigned long ? stats[NR_SCANSTATS]; ? ?/* local statistics */ > + ? ? ? unsigned long ? totalstats[NR_SCANSTATS]; ? /* hierarchical */ > +}; > + > +const char *scanstat_string[NR_SCANSTATS] = { > + ? ? ? "scanned_pages_by_limit", > + ? ? ? "freed_pages_by_limit", > + ? ? ? "elapsed_ns_by_limit", > + > + ? ? ? "scanned_pages_by_system", > + ? ? ? "freed_pages_by_system", > + ? ? ? "elapsed_ns_by_system", > + > + ? ? ? "scanned_pages_by_shrink", > + ? ? ? "freed_pages_by_shrink", > + ? ? ? "elappsed_ns_by_shrink", > +}; > + > +const char *total_scanstat_string[NR_SCANSTATS] = { > + ? ? ? "total_scanned_pages_by_limit", > + ? ? ? "total_freed_pages_by_limit", > + ? ? ? "total_elapsed_ns_by_hierarchical", > + > + ? ? ? "total_scanned_pages_by_system", > + ? ? ? "total_freed_pages_by_system", > + ? ? ? "total_elapsed_ns_by_system", > + > + ? ? ? "total_scanned_pages_by_shrink", > + ? ? ? "total_freed_pages_by_shrink", > + ? ? ? "total_elapsed_ns_by_shrink", > +}; > + > ?/* > ?* The memory controller data structure. The memory controller controls both > ?* page cache and RSS per cgroup. We would eventually like to provide > @@ -264,7 +315,8 @@ struct mem_cgroup { > > ? ? ? ?/* For oom notifier event fd */ > ? ? ? ?struct list_head oom_notify; > - > + ? ? ? /* For recording LRU-scan statistics */ > + ? ? ? struct scanstat scanstat; > ? ? ? ?/* > ? ? ? ? * Should we move charges of a task when a task is moved into this > ? ? ? ? * mem_cgroup ? And what type of charges should we move ? > @@ -1634,6 +1686,28 @@ int mem_cgroup_select_victim_node(struct > ?} > ?#endif > > + > + > +static void mem_cgroup_record_scanstat(struct memcg_scanrecord *rec) > +{ > + ? ? ? struct mem_cgroup *mem; > + ? ? ? int context = rec->context; > + > + ? ? ? mem = rec->mem; > + ? ? ? spin_lock(&mem->scanstat.lock); > + ? ? ? mem->scanstat.stats[context] += rec->nr_scanned; > + ? ? ? mem->scanstat.stats[context + __FREED] += rec->nr_freed; > + ? ? ? mem->scanstat.stats[context + __ELAPSED] += rec->elappsed; > + ? ? ? spin_unlock(&mem->scanstat.lock); > + > + ? ? ? mem = rec->root; > + ? ? ? spin_lock(&mem->scanstat.lock); > + ? ? ? mem->scanstat.totalstats[context] += rec->nr_scanned; > + ? ? ? mem->scanstat.totalstats[context + __FREED] += rec->nr_freed; > + ? ? ? mem->scanstat.totalstats[context + __ELAPSED] += rec->elappsed; > + ? ? ? spin_unlock(&mem->scanstat.lock); > +} > + > ?/* > ?* Scan the hierarchy if needed to reclaim memory. We remember the last child > ?* we reclaimed from, so that we don't end up penalizing one child extensively > @@ -1659,8 +1733,8 @@ static int mem_cgroup_hierarchical_recla > ? ? ? ?bool shrink = reclaim_options & MEM_CGROUP_RECLAIM_SHRINK; > ? ? ? ?bool check_soft = reclaim_options & MEM_CGROUP_RECLAIM_SOFT; > ? ? ? ?unsigned long excess; > - ? ? ? unsigned long nr_scanned; > ? ? ? ?int visit; > + ? ? ? struct memcg_scanrecord rec; > > ? ? ? ?excess = res_counter_soft_limit_excess(&root_mem->res) >> PAGE_SHIFT; > > @@ -1668,6 +1742,15 @@ static int mem_cgroup_hierarchical_recla > ? ? ? ?if (!check_soft && root_mem->memsw_is_minimum) > ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ?noswap = true; > > + ? ? ? if (shrink) > + ? ? ? ? ? ? ? rec.context = SCAN_BY_SHRINK; > + ? ? ? else if (check_soft) > + ? ? ? ? ? ? ? rec.context = SCAN_BY_SYSTEM; > + ? ? ? else > + ? ? ? ? ? ? ? rec.context = SCAN_BY_LIMIT; > + > + ? ? ? rec.root = root_mem; > + > ?again: > ? ? ? ?if (!shrink) { > ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ?visit = 0; > @@ -1695,14 +1778,19 @@ again: > ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ?css_put(&victim->css); > ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ?continue; > ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ?} > + ? ? ? ? ? ? ? rec.mem = victim; > + ? ? ? ? ? ? ? rec.nr_scanned = 0; > + ? ? ? ? ? ? ? rec.nr_freed = 0; > + ? ? ? ? ? ? ? rec.elappsed = 0; > ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ?/* we use swappiness of local cgroup */ > ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ?if (check_soft) { > ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ?ret = mem_cgroup_shrink_node_zone(victim, gfp_mask, > - ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? noswap, zone, &nr_scanned); > - ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? *total_scanned += nr_scanned; > + ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? noswap, zone, &rec); > + ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? *total_scanned += rec.nr_scanned; > ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ?} else > ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ?ret = try_to_free_mem_cgroup_pages(victim, gfp_mask, > - ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? noswap); > + ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? noswap, &rec); > + ? ? ? ? ? ? ? mem_cgroup_record_scanstat(&rec); > ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ?css_put(&victim->css); > > ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ?total += ret; > @@ -3757,7 +3845,8 @@ try_to_free: > ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ?ret = -EINTR; > ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ?goto out; > ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ?} > - ? ? ? ? ? ? ? progress = try_to_free_mem_cgroup_pages(mem, GFP_KERNEL, false); > + ? ? ? ? ? ? ? progress = try_to_free_mem_cgroup_pages(mem, > + ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? GFP_KERNEL, false, NULL); > ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ?if (!progress) { > ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ?nr_retries--; > ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ?/* maybe some writeback is necessary */ > @@ -4599,6 +4688,34 @@ static int mem_control_numa_stat_open(st > ?} > ?#endif /* CONFIG_NUMA */ > > +static int mem_cgroup_scan_stat_read(struct cgroup *cgrp, > + ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? struct cftype *cft, > + ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? struct cgroup_map_cb *cb) > +{ > + ? ? ? struct mem_cgroup *mem = mem_cgroup_from_cont(cgrp); > + ? ? ? int i; > + > + ? ? ? for (i = 0; i < NR_SCANSTATS; i++) > + ? ? ? ? ? ? ? cb->fill(cb, scanstat_string[i], mem->scanstat.stats[i]); > + ? ? ? for (i = 0; i < NR_SCANSTATS; i++) > + ? ? ? ? ? ? ? cb->fill(cb, total_scanstat_string[i], > + ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? mem->scanstat.totalstats[i]); > + ? ? ? return 0; > +} > + > +static int mem_cgroup_reset_scan_stat(struct cgroup *cgrp, > + ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? unsigned int event) > +{ > + ? ? ? struct mem_cgroup *mem = mem_cgroup_from_cont(cgrp); > + > + ? ? ? spin_lock(&mem->scanstat.lock); > + ? ? ? memset(&mem->scanstat.stats, 0, sizeof(mem->scanstat.stats)); > + ? ? ? memset(&mem->scanstat.totalstats, 0, sizeof(mem->scanstat.totalstats)); > + ? ? ? spin_unlock(&mem->scanstat.lock); > + ? ? ? return 0; > +} > + > + > ?static struct cftype mem_cgroup_files[] = { > ? ? ? ?{ > ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ?.name = "usage_in_bytes", > @@ -4669,6 +4786,11 @@ static struct cftype mem_cgroup_files[] > ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ?.mode = S_IRUGO, > ? ? ? ?}, > ?#endif > + ? ? ? { > + ? ? ? ? ? ? ? .name = "scan_stat", > + ? ? ? ? ? ? ? .read_map = mem_cgroup_scan_stat_read, > + ? ? ? ? ? ? ? .trigger = mem_cgroup_reset_scan_stat, > + ? ? ? }, > ?}; > > ?#ifdef CONFIG_CGROUP_MEM_RES_CTLR_SWAP > @@ -4932,6 +5054,7 @@ mem_cgroup_create(struct cgroup_subsys * > ? ? ? ?atomic_set(&mem->refcnt, 1); > ? ? ? ?mem->move_charge_at_immigrate = 0; > ? ? ? ?mutex_init(&mem->thresholds_lock); > + ? ? ? spin_lock_init(&mem->scanstat.lock); > ? ? ? ?return &mem->css; > ?free_out: > ? ? ? ?__mem_cgroup_free(mem); > Index: mmotm-0615/mm/vmscan.c > =================================================================== > --- mmotm-0615.orig/mm/vmscan.c > +++ mmotm-0615/mm/vmscan.c > @@ -2199,9 +2199,9 @@ unsigned long try_to_free_pages(struct z > ?#ifdef CONFIG_CGROUP_MEM_RES_CTLR > > ?unsigned long mem_cgroup_shrink_node_zone(struct mem_cgroup *mem, > - ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? gfp_t gfp_mask, bool noswap, > - ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? struct zone *zone, > - ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? unsigned long *nr_scanned) > + ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? gfp_t gfp_mask, bool noswap, > + ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? struct zone *zone, > + ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? struct memcg_scanrecord *rec) > ?{ > ? ? ? ?struct scan_control sc = { > ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ?.nr_scanned = 0, > @@ -2213,6 +2213,7 @@ unsigned long mem_cgroup_shrink_node_zon > ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ?.order = 0, > ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ?.mem_cgroup = mem, > ? ? ? ?}; > + ? ? ? unsigned long start, end; > > ? ? ? ?sc.gfp_mask = (gfp_mask & GFP_RECLAIM_MASK) | > ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ?(GFP_HIGHUSER_MOVABLE & ~GFP_RECLAIM_MASK); > @@ -2221,6 +2222,7 @@ unsigned long mem_cgroup_shrink_node_zon > ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ?sc.may_writepage, > ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ?sc.gfp_mask); > > + ? ? ? start = sched_clock(); > ? ? ? ?/* > ? ? ? ? * NOTE: Although we can get the priority field, using it > ? ? ? ? * here is not a good idea, since it limits the pages we can scan. > @@ -2229,19 +2231,27 @@ unsigned long mem_cgroup_shrink_node_zon > ? ? ? ? * the priority and make it zero. > ? ? ? ? */ > ? ? ? ?shrink_zone(0, zone, &sc); > + ? ? ? end = sched_clock(); > + > + ? ? ? if (rec) { > + ? ? ? ? ? ? ? rec->nr_scanned += sc.nr_scanned; > + ? ? ? ? ? ? ? rec->nr_freed += sc.nr_reclaimed; > + ? ? ? ? ? ? ? rec->elappsed += end - start; > + ? ? ? } > > ? ? ? ?trace_mm_vmscan_memcg_softlimit_reclaim_end(sc.nr_reclaimed); > > - ? ? ? *nr_scanned = sc.nr_scanned; > ? ? ? ?return sc.nr_reclaimed; > ?} > > ?unsigned long try_to_free_mem_cgroup_pages(struct mem_cgroup *mem_cont, > ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? gfp_t gfp_mask, > - ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ?bool noswap) > + ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ?bool noswap, > + ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ?struct memcg_scanrecord *rec) > ?{ > ? ? ? ?struct zonelist *zonelist; > ? ? ? ?unsigned long nr_reclaimed; > + ? ? ? unsigned long start, end; > ? ? ? ?int nid; > ? ? ? ?struct scan_control sc = { > ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ?.may_writepage = !laptop_mode, > @@ -2259,6 +2269,7 @@ unsigned long try_to_free_mem_cgroup_pag > ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ?.gfp_mask = sc.gfp_mask, > ? ? ? ?}; > > + ? ? ? start = sched_clock(); > ? ? ? ?/* > ? ? ? ? * Unlike direct reclaim via alloc_pages(), memcg's reclaim doesn't > ? ? ? ? * take care of from where we get pages. So the node where we start the > @@ -2273,6 +2284,12 @@ unsigned long try_to_free_mem_cgroup_pag > ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ?sc.gfp_mask); > > ? ? ? ?nr_reclaimed = do_try_to_free_pages(zonelist, &sc, &shrink); > + ? ? ? end = sched_clock(); > + ? ? ? if (rec) { > + ? ? ? ? ? ? ? rec->nr_scanned += sc.nr_scanned; > + ? ? ? ? ? ? ? rec->nr_freed += sc.nr_reclaimed; > + ? ? ? ? ? ? ? rec->elappsed += end - start; > + ? ? ? } > > ? ? ? ?trace_mm_vmscan_memcg_reclaim_end(nr_reclaimed); > > > -- 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/