[PATCH] memcg: drain all stocks for the cgroup before read usage

[PATCH] memcg: drain all stocks for the cgroup before read usage

[Kirill A. Shutemov]

From: "Kirill A. Shutemov" <kirill@shutemov.name>

Currently, mem_cgroup_usage() for non-root cgroup returns usage
including stocks.

Let's drain all socks before read resource counter value. It makes
memory{,.memcg}.usage_in_bytes and memory.stat consistent.

Signed-off-by: Kirill A. Shutemov <kirill@shutemov.name>
---
 mm/memcontrol.c |    1 +
 1 files changed, 1 insertions(+), 0 deletions(-)

diff --git a/mm/memcontrol.c b/mm/memcontrol.c
index ebd1e86..e091022 100644
--- a/mm/memcontrol.c
+++ b/mm/memcontrol.c
@@ -3943,6 +3943,7 @@ static inline u64 mem_cgroup_usage(struct mem_cgroup *mem, bool swap)
 	u64 val;
 
 	if (!mem_cgroup_is_root(mem)) {
+		drain_all_stock_sync(mem);
 		if (!swap)
 			return res_counter_read_u64(&mem->res, RES_USAGE);
 		else
-- 
1.7.5.4

[PATCH] memcg: drain all stocks for the cgroup before read usage

[Kirill A. Shutemov]

From: "Kirill A. Shutemov" <kirill@shutemov.name>

Currently, mem_cgroup_usage() for non-root cgroup returns usage
including stocks.

Let's drain all socks before read resource counter value. It makes
memory{,.memcg}.usage_in_bytes and memory.stat consistent.

Signed-off-by: Kirill A. Shutemov <kirill@shutemov.name>
---
 mm/memcontrol.c |    1 +
 1 files changed, 1 insertions(+), 0 deletions(-)

diff --git a/mm/memcontrol.c b/mm/memcontrol.c
index ebd1e86..e091022 100644
--- a/mm/memcontrol.c
+++ b/mm/memcontrol.c
@@ -3943,6 +3943,7 @@ static inline u64 mem_cgroup_usage(struct mem_cgroup *mem, bool swap)
 	u64 val;
 
 	if (!mem_cgroup_is_root(mem)) {
+		drain_all_stock_sync(mem);
 		if (!swap)
 			return res_counter_read_u64(&mem->res, RES_USAGE);
 		else
-- 
1.7.5.4

--
To unsubscribe, send a message with 'unsubscribe linux-mm' in
the body to majordomo@kvack.org.  For more info on Linux MM,
see: http://www.linux-mm.org/ .
Fight unfair telecom internet charges in Canada: sign http://stopthemeter.ca/
Don't email: <a href=mailto:"dont@kvack.org"> email@kvack.org </a>

Re: [PATCH] memcg: drain all stocks for the cgroup before read usage

[Paul Menage]

On Sat, Sep 3, 2011 at 6:15 PM, Kirill A. Shutemov <kirill@shutemov.name> wrote:
> From: "Kirill A. Shutemov" <kirill@shutemov.name>
>
> Currently, mem_cgroup_usage() for non-root cgroup returns usage
> including stocks.
>
> Let's drain all socks before read resource counter value. It makes
> memory{,.memcg}.usage_in_bytes and memory.stat consistent.

Isn't that quite an expensive operation, and bear in mind that
resource control trackers may be reading this file very frequently,
maybe every second or so.

How about having a trigger file that can be written to force the drain
for cases where the consistency is really desired? Or a separate
usage_in_bytes_consistent file that does the drain.

Paul

>
> Signed-off-by: Kirill A. Shutemov <kirill@shutemov.name>
> ---
>  mm/memcontrol.c |    1 +
>  1 files changed, 1 insertions(+), 0 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/mm/memcontrol.c b/mm/memcontrol.c
> index ebd1e86..e091022 100644
> --- a/mm/memcontrol.c
> +++ b/mm/memcontrol.c
> @@ -3943,6 +3943,7 @@ static inline u64 mem_cgroup_usage(struct mem_cgroup *mem, bool swap)
>        u64 val;
>
>        if (!mem_cgroup_is_root(mem)) {
> +               drain_all_stock_sync(mem);
>                if (!swap)
>                        return res_counter_read_u64(&mem->res, RES_USAGE);
>                else
> --
> 1.7.5.4
>
> --
> To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
> the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
> More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
> Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/
>

Re: [PATCH] memcg: drain all stocks for the cgroup before read usage

[Paul Menage]

On Sat, Sep 3, 2011 at 6:15 PM, Kirill A. Shutemov <kirill@shutemov.name> wrote:
> From: "Kirill A. Shutemov" <kirill@shutemov.name>
>
> Currently, mem_cgroup_usage() for non-root cgroup returns usage
> including stocks.
>
> Let's drain all socks before read resource counter value. It makes
> memory{,.memcg}.usage_in_bytes and memory.stat consistent.

Isn't that quite an expensive operation, and bear in mind that
resource control trackers may be reading this file very frequently,
maybe every second or so.

How about having a trigger file that can be written to force the drain
for cases where the consistency is really desired? Or a separate
usage_in_bytes_consistent file that does the drain.

Paul

>
> Signed-off-by: Kirill A. Shutemov <kirill@shutemov.name>
> ---
>  mm/memcontrol.c |    1 +
>  1 files changed, 1 insertions(+), 0 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/mm/memcontrol.c b/mm/memcontrol.c
> index ebd1e86..e091022 100644
> --- a/mm/memcontrol.c
> +++ b/mm/memcontrol.c
> @@ -3943,6 +3943,7 @@ static inline u64 mem_cgroup_usage(struct mem_cgroup *mem, bool swap)
>        u64 val;
>
>        if (!mem_cgroup_is_root(mem)) {
> +               drain_all_stock_sync(mem);
>                if (!swap)
>                        return res_counter_read_u64(&mem->res, RES_USAGE);
>                else
> --
> 1.7.5.4
>
> --
> To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
> the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
> More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
> Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/
>

--
To unsubscribe, send a message with 'unsubscribe linux-mm' in
the body to majordomo@kvack.org.  For more info on Linux MM,
see: http://www.linux-mm.org/ .
Fight unfair telecom internet charges in Canada: sign http://stopthemeter.ca/
Don't email: <a href=mailto:"dont@kvack.org"> email@kvack.org </a>

Re: [PATCH] memcg: drain all stocks for the cgroup before read usage

[KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki]

On Sun,  4 Sep 2011 04:15:33 +0300
"Kirill A. Shutemov" <kirill@shutemov.name> wrote:

> From: "Kirill A. Shutemov" <kirill@shutemov.name>
> 
> Currently, mem_cgroup_usage() for non-root cgroup returns usage
> including stocks.
> 
> Let's drain all socks before read resource counter value. It makes
> memory{,.memcg}.usage_in_bytes and memory.stat consistent.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Kirill A. Shutemov <kirill@shutemov.name>

Hmm. This seems costly to me. 

If a user chesk usage_in_bytes in a memcg once per 1sec, 
the kernel will call schedule_work on cpus once per 1sec.
So, IMHO, I don't like this.

But if some other guys want this, I'll ack.

BTW, how this affects memory.stat ?

Thanks,
-Kame

Re: [PATCH] memcg: drain all stocks for the cgroup before read usage

[KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki]

On Sun,  4 Sep 2011 04:15:33 +0300
"Kirill A. Shutemov" <kirill@shutemov.name> wrote:

> From: "Kirill A. Shutemov" <kirill@shutemov.name>
> 
> Currently, mem_cgroup_usage() for non-root cgroup returns usage
> including stocks.
> 
> Let's drain all socks before read resource counter value. It makes
> memory{,.memcg}.usage_in_bytes and memory.stat consistent.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Kirill A. Shutemov <kirill@shutemov.name>

Hmm. This seems costly to me. 

If a user chesk usage_in_bytes in a memcg once per 1sec, 
the kernel will call schedule_work on cpus once per 1sec.
So, IMHO, I don't like this.

But if some other guys want this, I'll ack.

BTW, how this affects memory.stat ?

Thanks,
-Kame

--
To unsubscribe, send a message with 'unsubscribe linux-mm' in
the body to majordomo@kvack.org.  For more info on Linux MM,
see: http://www.linux-mm.org/ .
Fight unfair telecom internet charges in Canada: sign http://stopthemeter.ca/
Don't email: <a href=mailto:"dont@kvack.org"> email@kvack.org </a>

Re: [PATCH] memcg: drain all stocks for the cgroup before read usage

[Daisuke Nishimura]

On Mon, 5 Sep 2011 08:59:13 +0900
KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki <kamezawa.hiroyu@jp.fujitsu.com> wrote:

> On Sun,  4 Sep 2011 04:15:33 +0300
> "Kirill A. Shutemov" <kirill@shutemov.name> wrote:
> 
> > From: "Kirill A. Shutemov" <kirill@shutemov.name>
> > 
> > Currently, mem_cgroup_usage() for non-root cgroup returns usage
> > including stocks.
> > 
> > Let's drain all socks before read resource counter value. It makes
> > memory{,.memcg}.usage_in_bytes and memory.stat consistent.
> > 
> > Signed-off-by: Kirill A. Shutemov <kirill@shutemov.name>
> 
> Hmm. This seems costly to me. 
> 
> If a user chesk usage_in_bytes in a memcg once per 1sec, 
> the kernel will call schedule_work on cpus once per 1sec.
> So, IMHO, I don't like this.
> 
I agree.

We discussed a similar topic on the thread https://lkml.org/lkml/2011/3/18/212.
And, we added the memory.txt:
---
5.5 usage_in_bytes

For efficiency, as other kernel components, memory cgroup uses some optimization
to avoid unnecessary cacheline false sharing. usage_in_bytes is affected by the
method and doesn't show 'exact' value of memory(and swap) usage, it's an fuzz
value for efficient access. (Of course, when necessary, it's synchronized.)
If you want to know more exact memory usage, you should use RSS+CACHE(+SWAP)
value in memory.stat(see 5.2).
---

Thanks,
Daisuke Nishimura.

Re: [PATCH] memcg: drain all stocks for the cgroup before read usage

[Daisuke Nishimura]

On Mon, 5 Sep 2011 08:59:13 +0900
KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki <kamezawa.hiroyu@jp.fujitsu.com> wrote:

> On Sun,  4 Sep 2011 04:15:33 +0300
> "Kirill A. Shutemov" <kirill@shutemov.name> wrote:
> 
> > From: "Kirill A. Shutemov" <kirill@shutemov.name>
> > 
> > Currently, mem_cgroup_usage() for non-root cgroup returns usage
> > including stocks.
> > 
> > Let's drain all socks before read resource counter value. It makes
> > memory{,.memcg}.usage_in_bytes and memory.stat consistent.
> > 
> > Signed-off-by: Kirill A. Shutemov <kirill@shutemov.name>
> 
> Hmm. This seems costly to me. 
> 
> If a user chesk usage_in_bytes in a memcg once per 1sec, 
> the kernel will call schedule_work on cpus once per 1sec.
> So, IMHO, I don't like this.
> 
I agree.

We discussed a similar topic on the thread https://lkml.org/lkml/2011/3/18/212.
And, we added the memory.txt:
---
5.5 usage_in_bytes

For efficiency, as other kernel components, memory cgroup uses some optimization
to avoid unnecessary cacheline false sharing. usage_in_bytes is affected by the
method and doesn't show 'exact' value of memory(and swap) usage, it's an fuzz
value for efficient access. (Of course, when necessary, it's synchronized.)
If you want to know more exact memory usage, you should use RSS+CACHE(+SWAP)
value in memory.stat(see 5.2).
---

Thanks,
Daisuke Nishimura.

--
To unsubscribe, send a message with 'unsubscribe linux-mm' in
the body to majordomo@kvack.org.  For more info on Linux MM,
see: http://www.linux-mm.org/ .
Fight unfair telecom internet charges in Canada: sign http://stopthemeter.ca/
Don't email: <a href=mailto:"dont@kvack.org"> email@kvack.org </a>

Re: [PATCH] memcg: drain all stocks for the cgroup before read usage

[Kirill A. Shutemov]

On Mon, Sep 05, 2011 at 10:16:07AM +0900, Daisuke Nishimura wrote:
> On Mon, 5 Sep 2011 08:59:13 +0900
> KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki <kamezawa.hiroyu@jp.fujitsu.com> wrote:
> 
> > On Sun,  4 Sep 2011 04:15:33 +0300
> > "Kirill A. Shutemov" <kirill@shutemov.name> wrote:
> > 
> > > From: "Kirill A. Shutemov" <kirill@shutemov.name>
> > > 
> > > Currently, mem_cgroup_usage() for non-root cgroup returns usage
> > > including stocks.
> > > 
> > > Let's drain all socks before read resource counter value. It makes
> > > memory{,.memcg}.usage_in_bytes and memory.stat consistent.
> > > 
> > > Signed-off-by: Kirill A. Shutemov <kirill@shutemov.name>
> > 
> > Hmm. This seems costly to me. 
> > 
> > If a user chesk usage_in_bytes in a memcg once per 1sec, 
> > the kernel will call schedule_work on cpus once per 1sec.
> > So, IMHO, I don't like this.
> > 
> I agree.
> 
> We discussed a similar topic on the thread https://lkml.org/lkml/2011/3/18/212.
> And, we added the memory.txt:
> ---
> 5.5 usage_in_bytes
> 
> For efficiency, as other kernel components, memory cgroup uses some optimization
> to avoid unnecessary cacheline false sharing. usage_in_bytes is affected by the
> method and doesn't show 'exact' value of memory(and swap) usage, it's an fuzz
> value for efficient access. (Of course, when necessary, it's synchronized.)
> If you want to know more exact memory usage, you should use RSS+CACHE(+SWAP)
> value in memory.stat(see 5.2).
> ---

Agree, thanks.

Should we have field 'ram' (or 'memory') for rss+cache in memory.stat?

-- 
 Kirill A. Shutemov

Re: [PATCH] memcg: drain all stocks for the cgroup before read usage

[Kirill A. Shutemov]

On Mon, Sep 05, 2011 at 10:16:07AM +0900, Daisuke Nishimura wrote:
> On Mon, 5 Sep 2011 08:59:13 +0900
> KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki <kamezawa.hiroyu@jp.fujitsu.com> wrote:
> 
> > On Sun,  4 Sep 2011 04:15:33 +0300
> > "Kirill A. Shutemov" <kirill@shutemov.name> wrote:
> > 
> > > From: "Kirill A. Shutemov" <kirill@shutemov.name>
> > > 
> > > Currently, mem_cgroup_usage() for non-root cgroup returns usage
> > > including stocks.
> > > 
> > > Let's drain all socks before read resource counter value. It makes
> > > memory{,.memcg}.usage_in_bytes and memory.stat consistent.
> > > 
> > > Signed-off-by: Kirill A. Shutemov <kirill@shutemov.name>
> > 
> > Hmm. This seems costly to me. 
> > 
> > If a user chesk usage_in_bytes in a memcg once per 1sec, 
> > the kernel will call schedule_work on cpus once per 1sec.
> > So, IMHO, I don't like this.
> > 
> I agree.
> 
> We discussed a similar topic on the thread https://lkml.org/lkml/2011/3/18/212.
> And, we added the memory.txt:
> ---
> 5.5 usage_in_bytes
> 
> For efficiency, as other kernel components, memory cgroup uses some optimization
> to avoid unnecessary cacheline false sharing. usage_in_bytes is affected by the
> method and doesn't show 'exact' value of memory(and swap) usage, it's an fuzz
> value for efficient access. (Of course, when necessary, it's synchronized.)
> If you want to know more exact memory usage, you should use RSS+CACHE(+SWAP)
> value in memory.stat(see 5.2).
> ---

Agree, thanks.

Should we have field 'ram' (or 'memory') for rss+cache in memory.stat?

-- 
 Kirill A. Shutemov

--
To unsubscribe, send a message with 'unsubscribe linux-mm' in
the body to majordomo@kvack.org.  For more info on Linux MM,
see: http://www.linux-mm.org/ .
Fight unfair telecom internet charges in Canada: sign http://stopthemeter.ca/
Don't email: <a href=mailto:"dont@kvack.org"> email@kvack.org </a>

Re: [PATCH] memcg: drain all stocks for the cgroup before read usage

[KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki]

On Thu, 8 Sep 2011 00:33:40 +0300
"Kirill A. Shutemov" <kirill@shutemov.name> wrote:

> On Mon, Sep 05, 2011 at 10:16:07AM +0900, Daisuke Nishimura wrote:
> > On Mon, 5 Sep 2011 08:59:13 +0900
> > KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki <kamezawa.hiroyu@jp.fujitsu.com> wrote:
> > 
> > > On Sun,  4 Sep 2011 04:15:33 +0300
> > > "Kirill A. Shutemov" <kirill@shutemov.name> wrote:
> > > 
> > > > From: "Kirill A. Shutemov" <kirill@shutemov.name>
> > > > 
> > > > Currently, mem_cgroup_usage() for non-root cgroup returns usage
> > > > including stocks.
> > > > 
> > > > Let's drain all socks before read resource counter value. It makes
> > > > memory{,.memcg}.usage_in_bytes and memory.stat consistent.
> > > > 
> > > > Signed-off-by: Kirill A. Shutemov <kirill@shutemov.name>
> > > 
> > > Hmm. This seems costly to me. 
> > > 
> > > If a user chesk usage_in_bytes in a memcg once per 1sec, 
> > > the kernel will call schedule_work on cpus once per 1sec.
> > > So, IMHO, I don't like this.
> > > 
> > I agree.
> > 
> > We discussed a similar topic on the thread https://lkml.org/lkml/2011/3/18/212.
> > And, we added the memory.txt:
> > ---
> > 5.5 usage_in_bytes
> > 
> > For efficiency, as other kernel components, memory cgroup uses some optimization
> > to avoid unnecessary cacheline false sharing. usage_in_bytes is affected by the
> > method and doesn't show 'exact' value of memory(and swap) usage, it's an fuzz
> > value for efficient access. (Of course, when necessary, it's synchronized.)
> > If you want to know more exact memory usage, you should use RSS+CACHE(+SWAP)
> > value in memory.stat(see 5.2).
> > ---
> 
> Agree, thanks.
> 
> Should we have field 'ram' (or 'memory') for rss+cache in memory.stat?
> 

Why do you think so ?

Thanks,
-Kame

Re: [PATCH] memcg: drain all stocks for the cgroup before read usage

[KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki]

On Thu, 8 Sep 2011 00:33:40 +0300
"Kirill A. Shutemov" <kirill@shutemov.name> wrote:

> On Mon, Sep 05, 2011 at 10:16:07AM +0900, Daisuke Nishimura wrote:
> > On Mon, 5 Sep 2011 08:59:13 +0900
> > KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki <kamezawa.hiroyu@jp.fujitsu.com> wrote:
> > 
> > > On Sun,  4 Sep 2011 04:15:33 +0300
> > > "Kirill A. Shutemov" <kirill@shutemov.name> wrote:
> > > 
> > > > From: "Kirill A. Shutemov" <kirill@shutemov.name>
> > > > 
> > > > Currently, mem_cgroup_usage() for non-root cgroup returns usage
> > > > including stocks.
> > > > 
> > > > Let's drain all socks before read resource counter value. It makes
> > > > memory{,.memcg}.usage_in_bytes and memory.stat consistent.
> > > > 
> > > > Signed-off-by: Kirill A. Shutemov <kirill@shutemov.name>
> > > 
> > > Hmm. This seems costly to me. 
> > > 
> > > If a user chesk usage_in_bytes in a memcg once per 1sec, 
> > > the kernel will call schedule_work on cpus once per 1sec.
> > > So, IMHO, I don't like this.
> > > 
> > I agree.
> > 
> > We discussed a similar topic on the thread https://lkml.org/lkml/2011/3/18/212.
> > And, we added the memory.txt:
> > ---
> > 5.5 usage_in_bytes
> > 
> > For efficiency, as other kernel components, memory cgroup uses some optimization
> > to avoid unnecessary cacheline false sharing. usage_in_bytes is affected by the
> > method and doesn't show 'exact' value of memory(and swap) usage, it's an fuzz
> > value for efficient access. (Of course, when necessary, it's synchronized.)
> > If you want to know more exact memory usage, you should use RSS+CACHE(+SWAP)
> > value in memory.stat(see 5.2).
> > ---
> 
> Agree, thanks.
> 
> Should we have field 'ram' (or 'memory') for rss+cache in memory.stat?
> 

Why do you think so ?

Thanks,
-Kame


--
To unsubscribe, send a message with 'unsubscribe linux-mm' in
the body to majordomo@kvack.org.  For more info on Linux MM,
see: http://www.linux-mm.org/ .
Fight unfair telecom internet charges in Canada: sign http://stopthemeter.ca/
Don't email: <a href=mailto:"dont@kvack.org"> email@kvack.org </a>

Re: [PATCH] memcg: drain all stocks for the cgroup before read usage

[Kirill A. Shutemov]

On Thu, Sep 08, 2011 at 09:19:14AM +0900, KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki wrote:
> > Should we have field 'ram' (or 'memory') for rss+cache in memory.stat?
> > 
> 
> Why do you think so ?

It may be useful for scripting purpose. Just an idea.

-- 
 Kirill A. Shutemov

Re: [PATCH] memcg: drain all stocks for the cgroup before read usage

[Kirill A. Shutemov]

On Thu, Sep 08, 2011 at 09:19:14AM +0900, KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki wrote:
> > Should we have field 'ram' (or 'memory') for rss+cache in memory.stat?
> > 
> 
> Why do you think so ?

It may be useful for scripting purpose. Just an idea.

-- 
 Kirill A. Shutemov

--
To unsubscribe, send a message with 'unsubscribe linux-mm' in
the body to majordomo@kvack.org.  For more info on Linux MM,
see: http://www.linux-mm.org/ .
Fight unfair telecom internet charges in Canada: sign http://stopthemeter.ca/
Don't email: <a href=mailto:"dont@kvack.org"> email@kvack.org </a>

Re: [PATCH] memcg: drain all stocks for the cgroup before read usage

[KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki]

On Thu, 8 Sep 2011 03:49:07 +0300
"Kirill A. Shutemov" <kirill@shutemov.name> wrote:

> On Thu, Sep 08, 2011 at 09:19:14AM +0900, KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki wrote:
> > > Should we have field 'ram' (or 'memory') for rss+cache in memory.stat?
> > > 
> > 
> > Why do you think so ?
> 
> It may be useful for scripting purpose. Just an idea.
> 

Hmm, if you really want, please post a patch.
(in other thread)
I have no strong objection.

Thanks,
-Kame

Re: [PATCH] memcg: drain all stocks for the cgroup before read usage

[KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki]

On Thu, 8 Sep 2011 03:49:07 +0300
"Kirill A. Shutemov" <kirill@shutemov.name> wrote:

> On Thu, Sep 08, 2011 at 09:19:14AM +0900, KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki wrote:
> > > Should we have field 'ram' (or 'memory') for rss+cache in memory.stat?
> > > 
> > 
> > Why do you think so ?
> 
> It may be useful for scripting purpose. Just an idea.
> 

Hmm, if you really want, please post a patch.
(in other thread)
I have no strong objection.

Thanks,
-Kame

--
To unsubscribe, send a message with 'unsubscribe linux-mm' in
the body to majordomo@kvack.org.  For more info on Linux MM,
see: http://www.linux-mm.org/ .
Fight unfair telecom internet charges in Canada: sign http://stopthemeter.ca/
Don't email: <a href=mailto:"dont@kvack.org"> email@kvack.org </a>

Re: [PATCH] memcg: drain all stocks for the cgroup before read usage

[Johannes Weiner]

On Thu, Sep 08, 2011 at 03:49:07AM +0300, Kirill A. Shutemov wrote:
> On Thu, Sep 08, 2011 at 09:19:14AM +0900, KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki wrote:
> > > Should we have field 'ram' (or 'memory') for rss+cache in memory.stat?
> > 
> > Why do you think so ?
> 
> It may be useful for scripting purpose. Just an idea.

$ awk '/^cache/{mem+=$2} /^rss/{mem+=$2} END{print(mem)}' /sys/fs/cgroup/memory/memory.stat 
1904500736

Am I missing something here?

Re: [PATCH] memcg: drain all stocks for the cgroup before read usage

[Johannes Weiner]

On Thu, Sep 08, 2011 at 03:49:07AM +0300, Kirill A. Shutemov wrote:
> On Thu, Sep 08, 2011 at 09:19:14AM +0900, KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki wrote:
> > > Should we have field 'ram' (or 'memory') for rss+cache in memory.stat?
> > 
> > Why do you think so ?
> 
> It may be useful for scripting purpose. Just an idea.

$ awk '/^cache/{mem+=$2} /^rss/{mem+=$2} END{print(mem)}' /sys/fs/cgroup/memory/memory.stat 
1904500736

Am I missing something here?

--
To unsubscribe, send a message with 'unsubscribe linux-mm' in
the body to majordomo@kvack.org.  For more info on Linux MM,
see: http://www.linux-mm.org/ .
Fight unfair telecom internet charges in Canada: sign http://stopthemeter.ca/
Don't email: <a href=mailto:"dont@kvack.org"> email@kvack.org </a>