2009/8/24 KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki <kamezawa.hiroyu@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> On Sun, 23 Aug 2009 23:12:24 +0200
> Krzysztof Taraszka <krzysztof.taraszka@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> > :) excelent :)
> >
> > my ugly patch printing right now undefinied data but the idea was the
> same
> > :)
> > how about memsw_limit for swap? :>
> > I am looking for swap usage statistics from cgroup right now from
> > memcontrol.c :) but as you did the idea is good and should be add to the
> > kernel and lxc-tools :)
> >
>
> Hmm, why meminfo is necessary ? For cheating top/free/... etc ?
>
>
No, but if I am going to limit memory resources of container I would like to
see inside this container memory limits when using userspace tools (such as
top/free/...)
--
Krzysztof Taraszka
> >
> > 2009/8/23 Daniel Lezcano <daniel.lezcano@xxxxxxx>
> >
> > > Krzysztof Taraszka wrote:
> > >
> > >> 2009/8/23 Daniel Lezcano <daniel.lezcano@xxxxxxx>
> > >>
> > >> Krzysztof Taraszka wrote:
> > >>>
> > >>> 2009/8/23 Krzysztof Taraszka <krzysztof.taraszka@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> > >>>>
> > >>>>
> > >>>>
> > >>>> 2009/8/23 Krzysztof Taraszka <krzysztof.taraszka@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>> 2009/8/23 Daniel Lezcano <daniel.lezcano@xxxxxxx>
> > >>>>>>
> > >>>>>>
> > >>>>>>
> > >>>>>> Krzysztof Taraszka wrote:
> > >>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>> 2009/8/23 Daniel Lezcano <daniel.lezcano@xxxxxxx>
> > >>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>> Krzysztof Taraszka wrote:
> > >>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>> Hello,
> > >>>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>>> I am running lxc on my debian unstable sandbox and I have a
> few
> > >>>>>>>>>> question
> > >>>>>>>>>> about memory managament inside linux containers based on lxc
> > >>>>>>>>>> project.
> > >>>>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>>>> I have got linux kernel 2.6.30.5 with enabled :
> > >>>>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>>>> +Resource counter
> > >>>>>>>>>> ++ Memory Resource Controller for Control Groups
> > >>>>>>>>>> +++ Memory Resource Controller Swap Extension(EXPERIMENTAL)
> > >>>>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>>>> lxc-checkconfig pass all checks.
> > >>>>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>>>> I read about cgroups memory managament
> > >>>>>>>>>> (Documentation/cgroups/memory.txt)
> > >>>>>>>>>> and I tried to pass those value to my debian sandbox.
> > >>>>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>>>> And...
> > >>>>>>>>>> 'free -m' and 'top/htop' still show all available memory
> inside
> > >>>>>>>>>> container
> > >>>>>>>>>> (also If I set 32M for lxc.cgroup.memory.limit_in_bytes and
> > >>>>>>>>>> lxc.cgroup.memory.usage_in_bytes; and 64M for
> > >>>>>>>>>> lxc.cgroup.memory.memsw.usage_in_bytes and
> > >>>>>>>>>> lxc.cgroup.memory.memsw.limit_in_bytes free and top show all
> > >>>>>>>>>> resources).
> > >>>>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>>>> What I did wrong? Does the container always show all available
> > >>>>>>>>>> memory
> > >>>>>>>>>> resources without cgroup limitations?
> > >>>>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>>>> At the first glance I would say the configuration is correct.
> > >>>>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>>>> But AFAIR, the memory cgroup is not isolated, if you specify
> 32MB
> > >>>>>>>>> you
> > >>>>>>>>> will
> > >>>>>>>>> see all the memory available on the system either if you are
> not
> > >>>>>>>>> allowed to
> > >>>>>>>>> use more than 32MB. If you create a program which allocates
> 64MB
> > >>>>>>>>> within
> > >>>>>>>>> a
> > >>>>>>>>> container configured with 32MB, and you "touch" the pages (may
> be
> > >>>>>>>>> that
> > >>>>>>>>> can
> > >>>>>>>>> be done with one mmap call with the MAP_POPULATE option), you
> > >>>>>>>>> should
> > >>>>>>>>> see the
> > >>>>>>>>> application swapping and the "memory.failcnt" increasing.
> > >>>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>>> IMHO, showing all the memory available for the system instead
> of
> > >>>>>>>>> showing
> > >>>>>>>>> the allowed memory with the cgroup is weird but maybe there is
> a
> > >>>>>>>>> good
> > >>>>>>>>> reason
> > >>>>>>>>> to do that.
> > >>>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>>> Thank you Daniel for your reply.
> > >>>>>>>> I think that LXC should isolate memory available for containers
> like
> > >>>>>>>> Vserver
> > >>>>>>>> or FreeVPS do (memory + swap) if .cgroup.memory.* and
> > >>>>>>>> lxc.cgroup.memory.memsw.* is set.
> > >>>>>>>> Is there any possibility to make a patch for linux kernel /
> > >>>>>>>> lxc-tools
> > >>>>>>>> to
> > >>>>>>>> show the limitations inside cointainers propertly? I think is a
> good
> > >>>>>>>> idea
> > >>>>>>>> and it should be apply as soon as possible.
> > >>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>> Maybe a solution can be to add a new memory.meminfo file in the
> > >>>>>>> same
> > >>>>>>> format than /proc/meminfo, so it will be possible to mount --bind
> > >>>>>>> /cgroup/foo/memory.meminfo to /proc/meminfo for the container.
> > >>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>> Yes, I thought the same. This should allow the user-space tools
> > >>>>>> based on
> > >>>>>> /proc/meminfo (such as comand line "free") show limited
> information :)
> > >>>>>>
> > >>>>>>
> > >>>>>>
> > >>>>>> Hmmm... does the memory.stat is a good start point for make new
> one
> > >>>>> object
> > >>>>> memory.meminfo similar to /proc/meminfo? If so, I can play by my
> self
> > >>>>> with
> > >>>>> lxc-tools code.
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>>
> > >>>> Hmmm... Daniel, I have got a question (that do I thinking in the
> right
> > >>>> way).
> > >>>> here is an output from /proc/meminfo from openvz:
> > >>>>
> > >>>>
> > >>>> MemTotal: 262144 kB
> > >>>> MemFree: 232560 kB
> > >>>> Buffers: 0 kB
> > >>>> Cached: 0 kB
> > >>>> SwapCached: 0 kB
> > >>>> Active: 0 kB
> > >>>> Inactive: 0 kB
> > >>>> HighTotal: 0 kB
> > >>>> HighFree: 0 kB
> > >>>> LowTotal: 262144 kB
> > >>>> LowFree: 232560 kB
> > >>>> SwapTotal: 0 kB
> > >>>> SwapFree: 0 kB
> > >>>> Dirty: 0 kB
> > >>>> Writeback: 0 kB
> > >>>> AnonPages: 0 kB
> > >>>> Mapped: 0 kB
> > >>>> Slab: 0 kB
> > >>>> SReclaimable: 0 kB
> > >>>> SUnreclaim: 0 kB
> > >>>> PageTables: 0 kB
> > >>>> NFS_Unstable: 0 kB
> > >>>> Bounce: 0 kB
> > >>>> WritebackTmp: 0 kB
> > >>>> CommitLimit: 0 kB
> > >>>> Committed_AS: 0 kB
> > >>>> VmallocTotal: 0 kB
> > >>>> VmallocUsed: 0 kB
> > >>>> VmallocChunk: 0 kB
> > >>>> HugePages_Total: 0
> > >>>> HugePages_Free: 0
> > >>>> HugePages_Rsvd: 0
> > >>>> HugePages_Surp: 0
> > >>>> Hugepagesize: 2048 kB
> > >>>>
> > >>>> most of values are 0.
> > >>>>
> > >>>> I have an question about SwapTotal and SwapFree for LXC.
> > >>>> As I thinking that:
> > >>>>
> > >>>> MemTotal might be: hierarchical_memory_limit
> > >>>> MemFree might be: hierarchical_memory_limit - cache
> > >>>>
> > >>>>
> > >>>> I am not a memory expert, but isn't MemFree :
> hierarchical_memory_limit
> > >>> -
> > >>> rss ?
> > >>>
> > >>> the
> > >>>>
> > >>>> SwapTotal might be: hierarchical_memsw_limit
> > >>>> SwapFree might be: hierarchical_memsw_limit - rss
> > >>>>
> > >>>> rss - # of bytes of anonymous and swap cache memory
> > >>>> I don't know at all that hierarchical_memsw_limit is an good value
> for
> > >>>> swap
> > >>>> total, because as I read it is a mem+swap at all.
> > >>>>
> > >>>> Does the lxc memory.meminfo might look like above? Where can I get
> the
> > >>>> Hugepagesize?
> > >>>>
> > >>>>
> > >>>> Right, I agree most of the interesting information to create a
> > >>> memory.meminfo is already there in another file and another format.
> > >>> Probably
> > >>> some informations in memory.stat can be moved to memory.meminfo and
> this
> > >>> one
> > >>> can be step by step filled with cgroup memory statistic informations.
> > >>> IMO,
> > >>> if the memory controller displays memory statistics like a
> proc/meminfo
> > >>> file
> > >>> format, that will make consistency for these informations and make
> > >>> trivial
> > >>> the isolation/virtualization with a simple mount-bind.
> > >>>
> > >>>
> > >>>
> > >>> Hmm..
> > >> might be. Right now I am looking for and writing new function in
> > >> mm/memcontrol.c file for writing some stats in memory.meminfo file for
> > >> tests.
> > >> Dirty and ugly part of code, but if it will work as we thought
> > >> (mount-bind)
> > >> and as you wrote above, that will be very simple.
> > >> I am going to look how does the /proc/meminfo is doing by the openvz.
> > >> mm/memcontrol.c was wrote by xemul from openvz and balbir from ibm.
> > >> If I am thinking in the right way, guys from openvz made their own
> patch
> > >> for
> > >> meminfo based on the mm/memcontrol.c. If I am wrong - where do they
> taking
> > >> meminfo data? :)
> > >>
> > >
> > > I did this ugly patch patch for MemTotal/MemFree - maybe wrong :)
> > >
> > > Index: linux-2.6/mm/memcontrol.c
> > > ===================================================================
> > > --- linux-2.6.orig/mm/memcontrol.c 2009-06-23 12:00:52.000000000
> +0200
> > > +++ linux-2.6/mm/memcontrol.c 2009-08-23 22:49:02.000000000 +0200
> > > @@ -2200,6 +2200,27 @@ static int mem_cgroup_swappiness_write(s
> > > }
> > >
> > >
> > > +static int mem_cgroup_meminfo(struct cgroup *cgrp, struct cftype *cft,
> > > + struct seq_file *seq)
> > > +{
> > > +#define K(x) ((x) << 10)
> > > +
> > > + struct mem_cgroup *mem_cont = mem_cgroup_from_cont(cgrp);
> > > + struct mcs_total_stat mystat = { };
> > > + unsigned long long limit, memsw_limit;
> > > +
> > > + mem_cgroup_get_local_stat(mem_cont, &mystat);
> > > + memcg_get_hierarchical_limit(mem_cont, &limit, &memsw_limit);
> > > +
> > > + seq_printf(seq,
> > > + "MemTotal: %8llu kB\n"
> > > + "MemFree: %8llu kB\n",
> > > + limit / 1024, (limit - mystat.stat[MCS_RSS]) /
> 1024);
> > > +
> > > + return 0;
> > > +#undef K
> > > +}
> > > +
> > > static struct cftype mem_cgroup_files[] = {
> > > {
> > > .name = "usage_in_bytes",
> > > @@ -2242,6 +2263,10 @@ static struct cftype mem_cgroup_files[]
> > > .read_u64 = mem_cgroup_swappiness_read,
> > > .write_u64 = mem_cgroup_swappiness_write,
> > > },
> > > + {
> > > + .name = "meminfo",
> > > + .read_seq_string = mem_cgroup_meminfo,
> > > + },
> > > };
> > >
> > > #ifdef CONFIG_CGROUP_MEM_RES_CTLR_SWAP
> > >
> > >
> > > With the lxc tools I did:
> > >
> > > lxc-execute -n foo /bin/bash
> > > echo 268435456 > /cgroup/foo/memory.limit_in_bytes
> > > mount --bind /cgroup/foo/memory.meminfo /proc/meminfo
> > > for i in $(seq 1 100); do sleep 3600 & done
> > >
> > > And the result for "free" is:
> > >
> > > free:
> > >
> > > total used free shared buffers
> cached
> > > Mem: 262144 9692 252452 0 0
> 0
> > > -/+ buffers/cache: 9692 252452
> > > Swap: 0 0 0
> > >
> > >
> > > and for "top":
> > >
> > > top - 22:57:37 up 8 min, 1 user, load average: 0.00, 0.02, 0.00
> > > Tasks: 104 total, 1 running, 103 sleeping, 0 stopped, 0 zombie
> > > Cpu(s): 0.3%us, 1.0%sy, 0.0%ni, 98.4%id, 0.0%wa, 0.0%hi, 0.3%si,
> > > 0.0%st
> > > Mem: 262144k total, 9864k used, 252280k free, 0k
> buffers
> > > Swap: 0k total, 0k used, 0k free, 0k cached
> > >
> > > PID USER PR NI VIRT RES SHR S %CPU %MEM TIME+ COMMAND
> > > 337 root 20 0 14748 1132 872 R 1.0 0.4 0:00.24 top
> > > 1 root 20 0 8136 484 408 S 0.0 0.2 0:00.00 lxc-init
> > > 2 root 20 0 89980 1724 1348 S 0.0 0.7 0:00.70 bash
> > > 25 root 20 0 86916 612 524 S 0.0 0.2 0:00.00 sleep
> > > 232 root 20 0 86916 616 524 S 0.0 0.2 0:00.00 sleep
> > > 233 root 20 0 86916 612 524 S 0.0 0.2 0:00.00 sleep
> > > 234 root 20 0 86916 612 524 S 0.0 0.2 0:00.00 sleep
> > > 235 root 20 0 86916 612 524 S 0.0 0.2 0:00.00 sleep
> > > .....
> > >
> > >
> > > :)
> > >
> > >
> > _______________________________________________
> > Containers mailing list
> > Containers@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> > https://lists.linux-foundation.org/mailman/listinfo/containers
> >
>
>
_______________________________________________
Containers mailing list
Containers@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
https://lists.linux-foundation.org/mailman/listinfo/containers
