On Thu, Jun 15, 2023 at 12:00 PM 贺中坤 <hezhongkun.hzk@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > While looking at this in the past weeks, I believe that there are two distinct problems: > > 1. Direct zram usage by process within a cg ie. a process writing to a zram device > > 2. Indirect zram usage by a process within a cg via swap (described above) > > > > Both of them probably require different solutions. > > In order to fix #1, accounting a zram device should be accounted towards a cgroup. IMHO this is something that should be fixed. > > > > Yu Zhao and Yosry are probably much more familiar with the solution to #2. > > WRT per-cgrou-swapfile, to me this is addressing #2, but I agree with Yu Zhao, that there are probably better solutions to this. > > > > Lastly, this patchset, while it will possibly not address the swap issue (#2) completely, is it satisfying the needs of #1? > > > > - fabian > > Thanks for your reply, fabian. According to the previous design and > test results, this patchset can meet the need of direct and > indirect usage scenarios，charge the compressed memory to memory cgroup. As said, I can not speak about the indirect swap case, but if it is addressing the direct case, and putting the memory accounting on the cgroup - then this would address one of the use-cases I have in mind. Thanks! - fabian
