On 2/18/19 1:05 PM, Tejun Heo wrote:
On Sat, Feb 16, 2019 at 08:56:04AM +0800, Yang Shi wrote:
Since PSI has implemented some kind of measure of memory pressure, the
statement about lack of such measure is not true anymore.
Cc: Tejun Heo <tj@xxxxxxxxxx>
Cc: Johannes Weiner <hannes@xxxxxxxxxxx>
Cc: Jonathan Corbet <corbet@xxxxxxx>
Signed-off-by: Yang Shi <yang.shi@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
---
Documentation/admin-guide/cgroup-v2.rst | 3 +--
1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 2 deletions(-)
diff --git a/Documentation/admin-guide/cgroup-v2.rst b/Documentation/admin-guide/cgroup-v2.rst
index 7bf3f12..9a92013 100644
--- a/Documentation/admin-guide/cgroup-v2.rst
+++ b/Documentation/admin-guide/cgroup-v2.rst
@@ -1310,8 +1310,7 @@ network to a file can use all available memory but can also operate as
performant with a small amount of memory. A measure of memory
pressure - how much the workload is being impacted due to lack of
memory - is necessary to determine whether a workload needs more
-memory; unfortunately, memory pressure monitoring mechanism isn't
-implemented yet.
+memory.
Maybe refer to PSI?
I thought so too, but the above "memory.pressure" has already referred
to PSI. So, I was not sure if we should duplicate PSI information.
Thanks,
Yang
Thanks.
