On Fri, May 08, 2020 at 10:06:30AM -0700, Shakeel Butt wrote:
> One way to measure the efficiency of memory reclaim is to look at the
> ratio (pgscan+pfrefill)/pgsteal. However at the moment these stats are
> not updated consistently at the system level and the ratio of these are
> not very meaningful. The pgsteal and pgscan are updated for only global
> reclaim while pgrefill gets updated for global as well as cgroup
> reclaim.
> 
> Please note that this difference is only for system level vmstats. The
> cgroup stats returned by memory.stat are actually consistent. The
> cgroup's pgsteal contains number of reclaimed pages for global as well
> as cgroup reclaim. So, one way to get the system level stats is to get
> these stats from root's memory.stat, so, expose memory.stat for the root
> cgroup.
> 
>       from Johannes Weiner:
>       There are subtle differences between /proc/vmstat and
>       memory.stat, and cgroup-aware code that wants to watch the full
>       hierarchy currently has to know about these intricacies and
>       translate semantics back and forth.
> 
>       Generally having the fully recursive memory.stat at the root
>       level could help a broader range of usecases.

The changelog begs the question why we don't just "fix" the
system-level stats. It may be useful to include the conclusions from
that discussion, and why there is value in keeping the stats this way.

> Signed-off-by: Shakeel Butt <shake...@google.com>
> Suggested-by: Johannes Weiner <han...@cmpxchg.org>

Acked-by: Johannes Weiner <han...@cmpxchg.org>

Reply via email to