Re: [PATCH 08/10] memcg: add cgroupfs interface to memcg dirty limits

[Greg Thelen]

Ciju Rajan K <ciju@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> writes:

> Greg Thelen wrote:
>> Add cgroupfs interface to memcg dirty page limits:
>>   Direct write-out is controlled with:
>>   - memory.dirty_ratio
>>   - memory.dirty_bytes
>>
>>   Background write-out is controlled with:
>>   - memory.dirty_background_ratio
>>   - memory.dirty_background_bytes
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Andrea Righi <arighi@xxxxxxxxxxx>
>> Signed-off-by: Greg Thelen <gthelen@xxxxxxxxxx>
>> ---
>>  mm/memcontrol.c |   89 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
>>  1 files changed, 89 insertions(+), 0 deletions(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/mm/memcontrol.c b/mm/memcontrol.c
>> index 6ec2625..2d45a0a 100644
>> --- a/mm/memcontrol.c
>> +++ b/mm/memcontrol.c
>> @@ -100,6 +100,13 @@ enum mem_cgroup_stat_index {
>>  	MEM_CGROUP_STAT_NSTATS,
>>  };
>>
>> +enum {
>> +	MEM_CGROUP_DIRTY_RATIO,
>> +	MEM_CGROUP_DIRTY_BYTES,
>> +	MEM_CGROUP_DIRTY_BACKGROUND_RATIO,
>> +	MEM_CGROUP_DIRTY_BACKGROUND_BYTES,
>> +};
>> +
>>  struct mem_cgroup_stat_cpu {
>>  	s64 count[MEM_CGROUP_STAT_NSTATS];
>>  };
>> @@ -4292,6 +4299,64 @@ static int mem_cgroup_oom_control_write(struct cgroup *cgrp,
>>  	return 0;
>>  }
>>
>> +static u64 mem_cgroup_dirty_read(struct cgroup *cgrp, struct cftype *cft)
>> +{
>> +	struct mem_cgroup *mem = mem_cgroup_from_cont(cgrp);
>> +	bool root;
>> +
>> +	root = mem_cgroup_is_root(mem);
>> +
>> +	switch (cft->private) {
>> +	case MEM_CGROUP_DIRTY_RATIO:
>> +		return root ? vm_dirty_ratio : mem->dirty_param.dirty_ratio;
>> +	case MEM_CGROUP_DIRTY_BYTES:
>> +		return root ? vm_dirty_bytes : mem->dirty_param.dirty_bytes;
>> +	case MEM_CGROUP_DIRTY_BACKGROUND_RATIO:
>> +		return root ? dirty_background_ratio :
>> +			mem->dirty_param.dirty_background_ratio;
>> +	case MEM_CGROUP_DIRTY_BACKGROUND_BYTES:
>> +		return root ? dirty_background_bytes :
>> +			mem->dirty_param.dirty_background_bytes;
>> +	default:
>> +		BUG();
>> +	}
>> +}
>> +
>> +static int
>> +mem_cgroup_dirty_write(struct cgroup *cgrp, struct cftype *cft, u64 val)
>> +{
>> +	struct mem_cgroup *memcg = mem_cgroup_from_cont(cgrp);
>> +	int type = cft->private;
>> +
>> +	if (cgrp->parent == NULL)
>> +		return -EINVAL;
>> +	if ((type == MEM_CGROUP_DIRTY_RATIO ||
>> +	     type == MEM_CGROUP_DIRTY_BACKGROUND_RATIO) && val > 100)
>> +		return -EINVAL;
>> +	switch (type) {
>> +	case MEM_CGROUP_DIRTY_RATIO:
>> +		memcg->dirty_param.dirty_ratio = val;
>> +		memcg->dirty_param.dirty_bytes = 0;
>> +		break;
>> +	case MEM_CGROUP_DIRTY_BYTES:
>> +		memcg->dirty_param.dirty_bytes = val;
>> +		memcg->dirty_param.dirty_ratio  = 0;
>> +		break;
>> +	case MEM_CGROUP_DIRTY_BACKGROUND_RATIO:
>> +		memcg->dirty_param.dirty_background_ratio = val;
>> +		memcg->dirty_param.dirty_background_bytes = 0;
>> +		break;
>> +	case MEM_CGROUP_DIRTY_BACKGROUND_BYTES:
>> +		memcg->dirty_param.dirty_background_bytes = val;
>> +		memcg->dirty_param.dirty_background_ratio = 0;
>> +		break;
>> +	default:
>> +		BUG();
>> +		break;
>> +	}
>> +	return 0;
>> +}
>> +
>>  static struct cftype mem_cgroup_files[] = {
>>  	{
>>  		.name = "usage_in_bytes",
>> @@ -4355,6 +4420,30 @@ static struct cftype mem_cgroup_files[] = {
>>  		.unregister_event = mem_cgroup_oom_unregister_event,
>>  		.private = MEMFILE_PRIVATE(_OOM_TYPE, OOM_CONTROL),
>>  	},
>> +	{
>> +		.name = "dirty_ratio",
>> +		.read_u64 = mem_cgroup_dirty_read,
>> +		.write_u64 = mem_cgroup_dirty_write,
>> +		.private = MEM_CGROUP_DIRTY_RATIO,
>> +	},
>> +	{
>> +		.name = "dirty_bytes",
>> +		.read_u64 = mem_cgroup_dirty_read,
>> +		.write_u64 = mem_cgroup_dirty_write,
>> +		.private = MEM_CGROUP_DIRTY_BYTES,
>> +	},
>> +	{
>>   
> Is it a good idea to rename "dirty_bytes" to "dirty_limit_in_bytes" ?
> So that it can match with other memcg tunable naming convention.
> We already have memory.memsw.limit_in_bytes, memory.limit_in_bytes,
> memory.soft_limit_in_bytes, etc.

I see your point in trying to be more internally consistent with other
memcg counter.

It's a trade-off, either use names consistent with /proc/sys/vm, or use
names similar to other memory.* control files.  I prefer your suggestion
and will rename as you suggested, unless I hear strong objection.

>> +		.name = "dirty_background_ratio",
>> +		.read_u64 = mem_cgroup_dirty_read,
>> +		.write_u64 = mem_cgroup_dirty_write,
>> +		.private = MEM_CGROUP_DIRTY_BACKGROUND_RATIO,
>> +	},
>> +	{
>> +		.name = "dirty_background_bytes",
>> +		.read_u64 = mem_cgroup_dirty_read,
>> +		.write_u64 = mem_cgroup_dirty_write,
>> +		.private = MEM_CGROUP_DIRTY_BACKGROUND_BYTES,
>>   
> Similarly "dirty_background_bytes" to dirty_background_limit_in_bytes ?
>> +	},
>>  };
>>
>>  #ifdef CONFIG_CGROUP_MEM_RES_CTLR_SWAP
>>   

PS: I am collecting performance data on patch series (including Kame's
lockless writeback stats).  I should have some useful data today.
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/