Re: [PATCH 6/7] memcg: add per cgroup writeback pages accounting
From: Fengguang Wu <hidden>
Date: 2012-07-09 04:14:50
Also in:
linux-mm, lkml
On Mon, Jul 09, 2012 at 11:36:11AM +0800, Sha Zhengju wrote:
On 07/08/2012 10:53 PM, Fengguang Wu wrote:quoted
quoted
@@ -2245,7 +2252,10 @@ int test_set_page_writeback(struct page *page) { struct address_space *mapping = page_mapping(page); int ret; + bool locked; + unsigned long flags; + mem_cgroup_begin_update_page_stat(page,&locked,&flags); if (mapping) { struct backing_dev_info *bdi = mapping->backing_dev_info; unsigned long flags;@@ -2272,6 +2282,8 @@ int test_set_page_writeback(struct page *page) } if (!ret) account_page_writeback(page); + + mem_cgroup_end_update_page_stat(page,&locked,&flags); return ret; }Where is the MEM_CGROUP_STAT_FILE_WRITEBACK increased?It's in account_page_writeback(). void account_page_writeback(struct page *page) { + mem_cgroup_inc_page_stat(page, MEM_CGROUP_STAT_FILE_WRITEBACK); inc_zone_page_state(page, NR_WRITEBACK); }
I didn't find that chunk, perhaps it's lost due to rebase..
There isn't a unified interface to dec/inc writeback accounting, so I just follow that. Maybe we can rework account_page_writeback() to also account dec in?
The current seperate inc/dec paths are fine. It sounds like over-engineering if going any further. I'm a bit worried about some 3rd party kernel module to call account_page_writeback() without mem_cgroup_begin/end_update_page_stat(). Will that lead to serious locking issues, or merely inaccurate accounting? Thanks, Fengguang