From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org>
Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand
	id S1756056Ab2ARHRG (ORCPT <rfc822;w@1wt.eu>);
	Wed, 18 Jan 2012 02:17:06 -0500
Received: from mail-lpp01m010-f46.google.com ([209.85.215.46]:64353 "EHLO
	mail-lpp01m010-f46.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK)
	by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1755302Ab2ARHRE (ORCPT
	<rfc822;linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>);
	Wed, 18 Jan 2012 02:17:04 -0500
Date: Wed, 18 Jan 2012 09:16:49 +0200 (EET)
From: Pekka Enberg <penberg@kernel.org>
X-X-Sender: penberg@tux.localdomain
To: Minchan Kim <minchan@kernel.org>
cc: Rik van Riel <riel@redhat.com>, linux-mm <linux-mm@kvack.org>,
        LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>, leonid.moiseichuk@nokia.com,
        kamezawa.hiroyu@jp.fujitsu.com, mel@csn.ul.ie, rientjes@google.com,
        KOSAKI Motohiro <kosaki.motohiro@gmail.com>,
        Johannes Weiner <hannes@cmpxchg.org>,
        Marcelo Tosatti <mtosatti@redhat.com>,
        Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>, Ronen Hod <rhod@redhat.com>,
        KOSAKI Motohiro <kosaki.motohiro@jp.fujitsu.com>
Subject: Re: [RFC 1/3] /dev/low_mem_notify
In-Reply-To: <20120117232025.GB903@barrios-desktop.redhat.com>
Message-ID: <alpine.LFD.2.02.1201180905040.2488@tux.localdomain>
References: <1326788038-29141-1-git-send-email-minchan@kernel.org> <1326788038-29141-2-git-send-email-minchan@kernel.org> <CAOJsxLHGYmVNk7D9NyhRuqQDwquDuA7LtUtp-1huSn5F-GvtAg@mail.gmail.com> <4F15A34F.40808@redhat.com> <alpine.LFD.2.02.1201172044310.15303@tux.localdomain>
 <20120117232025.GB903@barrios-desktop.redhat.com>
User-Agent: Alpine 2.02 (LFD 1266 2009-07-14)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
List-ID: <linux-kernel.vger.kernel.org>
X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org

On Wed, 18 Jan 2012, Minchan Kim wrote:
> I didn't look into your code(will do) but as I read description,
> still I don't convince we need really some process specific threshold like 99%
> I think application can know it by polling /proc/meminfo without this mechanism
> if they really want.

I'm not sure if we need arbitrary threshold either. However, we need to 
support the following cases:

   - We're about to swap

   - We're about to run out of memory

   - We're about to start OOM killing

and I don't think your patch solves that. One possibility is to implement:

   VMNOTIFY_TYPE_ABOUT_TO_SWAP
   VMNOTIFY_TYPE_ABOUT_TO_OOM
   VMNOTIFY_TYPE_ABOUT_TO_OOM_KILL

and maybe rip out support for arbitrary thresholds. Does that more 
reasonable?

As for polling /proc/meminfo, I'd much rather deliver stats as part of 
vmnotify_read() because it's easier to extend the ABI rather than adding 
new fields to /proc/meminfo.

On Wed, 18 Jan 2012, Minchan Kim wrote:
> I would like to notify when system has a trobule with memory pressure without
> some process specific threshold. Of course, applicatoin can't expect it.(ie,
> application can know system memory pressure by /proc/meminfo but it can't know
> when swapout really happens). Kernel low mem notify have to give such notification
> to user space, I think.

It should be simple to add support for VMNOTIFY_TYPE_MEM_PRESSURE that 
uses your hooks.

 			Pekka