Hello. On Mon, Jan 13, 2025 at 10:25:34AM -0800, Shakeel Butt <shakeel.butt@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > and flushing efffectiveness depends on how individual readers are > > correlated, > > Sorry I am confused by the above statement, can you please expand on > what you meant by it? > > > OTOH writer correlation affects > > updaters when extending the update tree. > > Here I am confused about the difference between writer and updater. reader -- a call site that'd need to call cgroup_rstat_flush() to calculate aggregated stats writer (or updater) -- a call site that calls cgroup_rstat_updated() when it modifies whatever datum By correlated readers I meant that stats for multiple controllers are read close to each other (time-wise). First such a reader does the heavy lifting, consequent readers enjoy quick access. (With per-controller flushing, each reader would need to do the flush and I'm suspecting the total time non-linear wrt parts.) Similarly for writers, if multiple controller's data change in short window, only the first one has to construct the rstat tree from top down to self, the other are updating the same tree. > In-kernel memcg stats readers will be unaffected most of the time with > this change. The only difference will be when they flush, they will only > flush memcg stats. That "most of the time" is what depends on how other controller's readers are active. > Here I am assuming you meant measurements in terms of cpu cost or do you > have something else in mind? I have in mind something like Tejun's point 2: | 2. It has noticeable benefits in the targeted use cases. The cover letter mentions some old problems (which may not be problems nowadays with memcg flushing reworks) and it's not clear how the separation into per-controller trees impacts (today's) problems. (I can imagine if the problem is stated like: io.stat readers are unnecessarily waiting for memory.stat flushing, the benefit can be shown (unless io.stat readers could benefit from flushing triggered by e.g. memory). But I didn't get if _that_ is the problem.) Thanks, Michal
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
