On Fri, 16 Sep 2011 20:39:05 -0700 Michel Lespinasse <walken@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > Please comment on the following patches (which are against the v3.0 kernel). > We are using these to collect memory utilization statistics for each cgroup > accross many machines, and optimize job placement accordingly. Please consider updating /proc/kpageflags with the three new page flags. If "yes": update. If "no": explain/justify. Which prompts the obvious: the whole feature could have been mostly implemented in userspace, using kpageflags. Some additional kernel support would presumably be needed, but I'm not sure how much. If you haven't already done so, please sketch down what that infrastructure would look like and have a think about which approach is preferable? What bugs me a bit about the proposal is its cgroups-centricity. The question "how much memory is my application really using" comes up again and again. It predates cgroups. One way to answer that question is to force a massive amount of swapout on the entire machine, then let the system recover and take a look at your app's RSS two minutes later. This is very lame. It's a legitimate requirement, and the kstaled infrastructure puts a lot of things in place to answer it well. But as far as I can tell it doesn't quite get over the line. Then again, maybe it _does_ get there: put the application into a memcg all of its own, just for instrumentation purposes and then use kstaled to monitor it? <later> OK, I'm surprised to discover that kstaled is doing a physical scan and not a virtual one. I assume it works, but I don't know why. But it makes the above requirement harder, methinks. How does all this code get along with hugepages, btw? -- To unsubscribe, send a message with 'unsubscribe linux-mm' in the body to majordomo@xxxxxxxxx. For more info on Linux MM, see: http://www.linux-mm.org/ . Fight unfair telecom internet charges in Canada: sign http://stopthemeter.ca/ Don't email: <a href=mailto:"dont@xxxxxxxxx";> email@xxxxxxxxx </a>