On Mon, Oct 03, 2011 at 04:26:41PM +0400, Glauber Costa wrote: > On 10/03/2011 04:25 PM, Kirill A. Shutemov wrote: > > On Mon, Oct 03, 2011 at 04:19:18PM +0400, Glauber Costa wrote: > >> On 10/03/2011 04:14 PM, Kirill A. Shutemov wrote: > >>> On Mon, Oct 03, 2011 at 02:18:42PM +0400, Glauber Costa wrote: > >>>> This patch introduces kmem.tcp_current_memory file, living in the > >>>> kmem_cgroup filesystem. It is a simple read-only file that displays the > >>>> amount of kernel memory currently consumed by the cgroup. > >>>> > >>>> Signed-off-by: Glauber Costa<glommer@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> > >>>> CC: David S. Miller<davem@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> > >>>> CC: Hiroyouki Kamezawa<kamezawa.hiroyu@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> > >>>> CC: Eric W. Biederman<ebiederm@xxxxxxxxxxxx> > >>>> --- > >>>> Documentation/cgroups/memory.txt | 1 + > >>>> mm/memcontrol.c | 11 +++++++++++ > >>>> 2 files changed, 12 insertions(+), 0 deletions(-) > >>>> > >>>> diff --git a/Documentation/cgroups/memory.txt b/Documentation/cgroups/memory.txt > >>>> index 1ffde3e..f5a539d 100644 > >>>> --- a/Documentation/cgroups/memory.txt > >>>> +++ b/Documentation/cgroups/memory.txt > >>>> @@ -79,6 +79,7 @@ Brief summary of control files. > >>>> memory.independent_kmem_limit # select whether or not kernel memory limits are > >>>> independent of user limits > >>>> memory.kmem.tcp.max_memory # set/show hard limit for tcp buf memory > >>>> + memory.kmem.tcp.current_memory # show current tcp buf memory allocation > >>> > >>> Both are in pages, right? > >>> Shouldn't it be scaled to bytes and named uniform with other memcg file? > >>> memory.kmem.tcp.limit_in_bytes/usage_in_bytes. > >>> > >> You are absolutely correct. > >> Since the internal tcp comparison works, I just ended up never noticing > >> this. > > > > Should we have failcnt and max_usage_in_bytes for tcp as well? > > > > Well, we get a fail count from the tracer anyway, so I don't really see > a need for that. I see value in having it for the slab allocation > itself, but since this only controls the memory pressure framework, I > think we can live without it. > > That said, this is not a strong opinion. I can add it if you'd prefer. It's good for userspace to have the same set of files for all domains: - memory; - memory.memsw; - memory.kmem; - memory.kmem.tcp; - etc. Userspace can reuse code for handling them in this case. -- Kirill A. Shutemov -- 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>