From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Dave Hansen Subject: Re: [PATCH v6 07/11] VFS hot tracking: Add a /proc interface to control memory usage Date: Mon, 11 Nov 2013 14:15:00 -0800 Message-ID: <528156E4.1030409@intel.com> References: <1383745544-391-1-git-send-email-zwu.kernel@gmail.com> <1383745544-391-8-git-send-email-zwu.kernel@gmail.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Zhi Yong Wu , Chandra Seetharaman To: Zhi Yong Wu , viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk Return-path: Received: from mga02.intel.com ([134.134.136.20]:48043 "EHLO mga02.intel.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751716Ab3KKWPv (ORCPT ); Mon, 11 Nov 2013 17:15:51 -0500 In-Reply-To: <1383745544-391-8-git-send-email-zwu.kernel@gmail.com> Sender: linux-fsdevel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: On 11/06/2013 05:45 AM, Zhi Yong Wu wrote: > Introduce a /proc interface hot-mem-high-thresh and > to cap the memory which is consumed by hot_inode_item > and hot_range_item, and they will be in the unit of > 1M bytes. You don't seem to have any documentation for this, btw... :( > + .procname = "hot-mem-high-thresh", *Always* put units on these. I know you mention it in a code comment, but please also include it in the proc filename too. In general, why do you have to control the number of these statically? Shouldn't you just define a shrinker and let memory pressure determine how many of these we allow to exist?