[lkml]   [2020]   [Feb]   [27]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
SubjectRe: [PATCH] mm: memcontrol: asynchronous reclaim for memory.high
On Wed 26-02-20 16:12:23, Yang Shi wrote:
> Actually I'm wondering if we really need account CPU cycles used by
> background reclaimer or not. For our usecase (this may be not general), the
> purpose of background reclaimer is to avoid latency sensitive workloads get
> into direct relcaim (avoid the stall from direct relcaim). In fact it just
> "steal" CPU cycles from lower priority or best-effort workloads to guarantee
> latency sensitive workloads behave well. If the "stolen" CPU cycles are
> accounted, it means the latency sensitive workloads would get throttled from
> somewhere else later, i.e. by CPU share.

I believe we need to because that work is not for free and so you are
essentially stealing those CPUs cycles from everybody else outside of
your throttled cgroup.
Michal Hocko

 \ /
  Last update: 2020-02-27 10:59    [W:0.089 / U:0.100 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site