On 04/27/2018 08:41 PM, David Rientjes wrote:
> On Fri, 27 Apr 2018, Vlastimil Babka wrote:
>
>> It was in the original thread, see e.g.
>> <08524819-14ef-81d0-fa90-d7af13c6b...@suse.cz>
>>
>> However it will take some time to get that in mainline, and meanwhile
>> the current implementation does
On Fri, Apr 27, 2018 at 11:41:31AM -0700, David Rientjes wrote:
> On Fri, 27 Apr 2018, Vlastimil Babka wrote:
>
> > It was in the original thread, see e.g.
> > <08524819-14ef-81d0-fa90-d7af13c6b...@suse.cz>
> >
> > However it will take some time to get that in mainline, and meanwhile
> > the curr
On Fri, 27 Apr 2018, Vlastimil Babka wrote:
> It was in the original thread, see e.g.
> <08524819-14ef-81d0-fa90-d7af13c6b...@suse.cz>
>
> However it will take some time to get that in mainline, and meanwhile
> the current implementation does prevent a DOS. So I doubt it can be
> fully reverted -
On 04/27/2018 12:55 PM, Roman Gushchin wrote:
> On Fri, Apr 27, 2018 at 11:17:01AM +0200, Vlastimil Babka wrote:
>> On 04/26/2018 11:55 PM, David Rientjes wrote:
>>>
>>> Implementing this counter as a vmstat doesn't make much sense based on how
>>> it's used. Do you have a link to what Vlastimil
On Fri, Apr 27, 2018 at 11:17:01AM +0200, Vlastimil Babka wrote:
> On 04/26/2018 11:55 PM, David Rientjes wrote:
> > On Thu, 26 Apr 2018, Michal Hocko wrote:
> >
> >>> Don't show nr_indirectly_reclaimable in /proc/vmstat,
> >>> because there is no need in exporting this vm counter
> >>> to the use
On 04/26/2018 11:55 PM, David Rientjes wrote:
> On Thu, 26 Apr 2018, Michal Hocko wrote:
>
>>> Don't show nr_indirectly_reclaimable in /proc/vmstat,
>>> because there is no need in exporting this vm counter
>>> to the userspace, and some changes are expected
>>> in reclaimable object accounting, w
On Thu, 26 Apr 2018, Michal Hocko wrote:
> > Don't show nr_indirectly_reclaimable in /proc/vmstat,
> > because there is no need in exporting this vm counter
> > to the userspace, and some changes are expected
> > in reclaimable object accounting, which can alter
> > this counter.
> >
> > Signed-o
On Wed 25-04-18 20:14:22, Roman Gushchin wrote:
> Don't show nr_indirectly_reclaimable in /proc/vmstat,
> because there is no need in exporting this vm counter
> to the userspace, and some changes are expected
> in reclaimable object accounting, which can alter
> this counter.
>
> Signed-off-by: R
On Wed, 25 Apr 2018, Roman Gushchin wrote:
> > > Don't show nr_indirectly_reclaimable in /proc/vmstat,
> > > because there is no need in exporting this vm counter
> > > to the userspace, and some changes are expected
> > > in reclaimable object accounting, which can alter
> > > this counter.
> > >
On Wed, Apr 25, 2018 at 12:37:26PM -0700, David Rientjes wrote:
> On Wed, 25 Apr 2018, Roman Gushchin wrote:
>
> > Don't show nr_indirectly_reclaimable in /proc/vmstat,
> > because there is no need in exporting this vm counter
> > to the userspace, and some changes are expected
> > in reclaimable
On 04/25/2018 09:14 PM, Roman Gushchin wrote:
> Don't show nr_indirectly_reclaimable in /proc/vmstat,
> because there is no need in exporting this vm counter
> to the userspace, and some changes are expected
> in reclaimable object accounting, which can alter
> this counter.
Oh, you beat me to it,
On Wed, 25 Apr 2018, Roman Gushchin wrote:
> Don't show nr_indirectly_reclaimable in /proc/vmstat,
> because there is no need in exporting this vm counter
> to the userspace, and some changes are expected
> in reclaimable object accounting, which can alter
> this counter.
>
I don't think it shou
Don't show nr_indirectly_reclaimable in /proc/vmstat,
because there is no need in exporting this vm counter
to the userspace, and some changes are expected
in reclaimable object accounting, which can alter
this counter.
Signed-off-by: Roman Gushchin
Cc: Vlastimil Babka
Cc: Matthew Wilcox
Cc: An
13 matches
Mail list logo
