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

Groups > linux.kernel > #1424728

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

Show all headers | View raw

Hi Hannes,

On Thu, Jun 16, 2016 at 10:41:02AM -0400, Johannes Weiner wrote:
> On Wed, Jun 15, 2016 at 09:40:27AM +0900, Minchan Kim wrote:
> > A question is it seems cgroup2 doesn't have per-cgroup swappiness.
> > Why?
> > 
> > I think we need it in one-cgroup-per-app model.
> 
> Can you explain why you think that?
> 
> As we have talked about this recently in the LRU balancing thread,
> swappiness is the cost factor between file IO and swapping, so the
> only situation I can imagine you'd need a memcg swappiness setting is
> when you have different cgroups use different storage devices that do
> not have comparable speeds.
> 
> So I'm not sure I understand the relationship to an app-group model.

Sorry for lacking the inforamtion. I should have written more clear.
In fact, what we need is *per-memcg-swap-device*.

What I want is to avoid kill background application although memory
is overflow because cold launcing of app takes a very long time
compared to resume(ie, just switching). I also want to keep a mount
of free pages in the memory so that new application startup cannot
be stuck by reclaim activities.

To get free memory, I want to reclaim less important app rather than
killing. In this time, we can support two swap devices.

A one is zram, other is slow storage but much bigger than zram size.
Then, we can use storage swap to reclaim pages for not-important app
while we can use zram swap for for important app(e.g., forground app,
system services, daemon and so on).

IOW, we want to support mutiple swap device with one-cgroup-per-app
and the storage speed is totally different.

Back to linux.kernel | Previous | Next — Previous 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