Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]


Groups > linux.kernel > #1420965

Re: [PATCH v1 3/3] mm: per-process reclaim

From Johannes Weiner <hannes@cmpxchg.org>
Newsgroups linux.kernel
Subject Re: [PATCH v1 3/3] mm: per-process reclaim
Date 2016-06-13 17:10 +0200
Message-ID <rJBEZ-7YP-9@gated-at.bofh.it> (permalink)
References <rJuWR-3i5-9@gated-at.bofh.it> <rJuWS-3i5-45@gated-at.bofh.it>
Organization linux.* mail to news gateway

Show all headers | View raw


Hi Minchan,

On Mon, Jun 13, 2016 at 04:50:58PM +0900, Minchan Kim wrote:
> These day, there are many platforms available in the embedded market
> and sometime, they has more hints about workingset than kernel so
> they want to involve memory management more heavily like android's
> lowmemory killer and ashmem or user-daemon with lowmemory notifier.
> 
> This patch adds add new method for userspace to manage memory
> efficiently via knob "/proc/<pid>/reclaim" so platform can reclaim
> any process anytime.

Cgroups are our canonical way to control system resources on a per
process or group-of-processes level. I don't like the idea of adding
ad-hoc interfaces for single-use cases like this.

For this particular case, you can already stick each app into its own
cgroup and use memory.force_empty to target-reclaim them.

Or better yet, set the soft limits / memory.low to guide physical
memory pressure, once it actually occurs, toward the least-important
apps? We usually prefer doing work on-demand rather than proactively.

The one-cgroup-per-app model would give Android much more control and
would also remove a *lot* of overhead during task switches, see this:
https://lkml.org/lkml/2014/12/19/358

Back to linux.kernel | Previous | NextPrevious in thread | Next in thread | Find similar | Unroll thread


Thread

[PATCH v1 0/3] per-process reclaim Minchan Kim <minchan@kernel.org> - 2016-06-13 10:00 +0200
  [PATCH v1 3/3] mm: per-process reclaim Minchan Kim <minchan@kernel.org> - 2016-06-13 10:00 +0200
    Re: [PATCH v1 3/3] mm: per-process reclaim Johannes Weiner <hannes@cmpxchg.org> - 2016-06-13 17:10 +0200
      Re: [PATCH v1 3/3] mm: per-process reclaim Minchan Kim <minchan@kernel.org> - 2016-06-15 02:50 +0200
        Re: [PATCH v1 3/3] mm: per-process reclaim Michal Hocko <mhocko@kernel.org> - 2016-06-16 13:10 +0200
        Re: [PATCH v1 3/3] mm: per-process reclaim Johannes Weiner <hannes@cmpxchg.org> - 2016-06-16 16:50 +0200
          Re: [PATCH v1 3/3] mm: per-process reclaim Minchan Kim <minchan@kernel.org> - 2016-06-17 08:50 +0200
      Re: [PATCH v1 3/3] mm: per-process reclaim Balbir Singh <bsingharora@gmail.com> - 2016-06-17 09:30 +0200
        Re: [PATCH v1 3/3] mm: per-process reclaim Vinayak Menon <vinmenon@codeaurora.org> - 2016-06-17 10:00 +0200
    Re: [PATCH v1 3/3] mm: per-process reclaim Rik van Riel <riel@redhat.com> - 2016-06-13 19:10 +0200
      Re: [PATCH v1 3/3] mm: per-process reclaim Minchan Kim <minchan@kernel.org> - 2016-06-15 03:10 +0200
  [PATCH v1 1/3] mm: vmscan: refactoring force_reclaim Minchan Kim <minchan@kernel.org> - 2016-06-13 10:00 +0200
  Re: [PATCH v1 0/3] per-process reclaim Chen Feng <puck.chen@hisilicon.com> - 2016-06-13 14:00 +0200
    Re: [PATCH v1 0/3] per-process reclaim "ZhaoJunmin Zhao(Junmin)" <zhaojunmin@huawei.com> - 2016-06-13 14:30 +0200
    Re: [PATCH v1 0/3] per-process reclaim Minchan Kim <minchan@kernel.org> - 2016-06-15 02:50 +0200
  Re: [PATCH v1 0/3] per-process reclaim Vinayak Menon <vinmenon@codeaurora.org> - 2016-06-13 15:40 +0200
    Re: [PATCH v1 0/3] per-process reclaim Minchan Kim <minchan@kernel.org> - 2016-06-15 03:00 +0200
      Re: [PATCH v1 0/3] per-process reclaim Vinayak Menon <vinmenon@codeaurora.org> - 2016-06-16 06:30 +0200

csiph-web