[Devel] Re: [lxc-devel] Memory Resources
Krzysztof Taraszka
krzysztof.taraszka at gnuhosting.net
Sun Aug 23 13:18:42 PDT 2009
2009/8/23 Daniel Lezcano <daniel.lezcano at free.fr>
> Krzysztof Taraszka wrote:
>
>> 2009/8/23 Krzysztof Taraszka <krzysztof.taraszka at gnuhosting.net>
>>
>>
>>
>>> 2009/8/23 Krzysztof Taraszka <krzysztof.taraszka at gnuhosting.net>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>> 2009/8/23 Daniel Lezcano <daniel.lezcano at free.fr>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>> Krzysztof Taraszka wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>> 2009/8/23 Daniel Lezcano <daniel.lezcano at free.fr>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Krzysztof Taraszka wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Hello,
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> I am running lxc on my debian unstable sandbox and I have a few
>>>>>>>> question
>>>>>>>> about memory managament inside linux containers based on lxc
>>>>>>>> project.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> I have got linux kernel 2.6.30.5 with enabled :
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> +Resource counter
>>>>>>>> ++ Memory Resource Controller for Control Groups
>>>>>>>> +++ Memory Resource Controller Swap Extension(EXPERIMENTAL)
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> lxc-checkconfig pass all checks.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> I read about cgroups memory managament
>>>>>>>> (Documentation/cgroups/memory.txt)
>>>>>>>> and I tried to pass those value to my debian sandbox.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> And...
>>>>>>>> 'free -m' and 'top/htop' still show all available memory inside
>>>>>>>> container
>>>>>>>> (also If I set 32M for lxc.cgroup.memory.limit_in_bytes and
>>>>>>>> lxc.cgroup.memory.usage_in_bytes; and 64M for
>>>>>>>> lxc.cgroup.memory.memsw.usage_in_bytes and
>>>>>>>> lxc.cgroup.memory.memsw.limit_in_bytes free and top show all
>>>>>>>> resources).
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> What I did wrong? Does the container always show all available
>>>>>>>> memory
>>>>>>>> resources without cgroup limitations?
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> At the first glance I would say the configuration is correct.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> But AFAIR, the memory cgroup is not isolated, if you specify 32MB you
>>>>>>> will
>>>>>>> see all the memory available on the system either if you are not
>>>>>>> allowed to
>>>>>>> use more than 32MB. If you create a program which allocates 64MB
>>>>>>> within
>>>>>>> a
>>>>>>> container configured with 32MB, and you "touch" the pages (may be
>>>>>>> that
>>>>>>> can
>>>>>>> be done with one mmap call with the MAP_POPULATE option), you should
>>>>>>> see the
>>>>>>> application swapping and the "memory.failcnt" increasing.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> IMHO, showing all the memory available for the system instead of
>>>>>>> showing
>>>>>>> the allowed memory with the cgroup is weird but maybe there is a good
>>>>>>> reason
>>>>>>> to do that.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>> Thank you Daniel for your reply.
>>>>>> I think that LXC should isolate memory available for containers like
>>>>>> Vserver
>>>>>> or FreeVPS do (memory + swap) if .cgroup.memory.* and
>>>>>> lxc.cgroup.memory.memsw.* is set.
>>>>>> Is there any possibility to make a patch for linux kernel / lxc-tools
>>>>>> to
>>>>>> show the limitations inside cointainers propertly? I think is a good
>>>>>> idea
>>>>>> and it should be apply as soon as possible.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>> Maybe a solution can be to add a new memory.meminfo file in the same
>>>>> format than /proc/meminfo, so it will be possible to mount --bind
>>>>> /cgroup/foo/memory.meminfo to /proc/meminfo for the container.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>> Yes, I thought the same. This should allow the user-space tools based on
>>>> /proc/meminfo (such as comand line "free") show limited information :)
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>> Hmmm... does the memory.stat is a good start point for make new one
>>> object
>>> memory.meminfo similar to /proc/meminfo? If so, I can play by my self
>>> with
>>> lxc-tools code.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>> Hmmm... Daniel, I have got a question (that do I thinking in the right
>> way).
>> here is an output from /proc/meminfo from openvz:
>>
>>
>> MemTotal: 262144 kB
>> MemFree: 232560 kB
>> Buffers: 0 kB
>> Cached: 0 kB
>> SwapCached: 0 kB
>> Active: 0 kB
>> Inactive: 0 kB
>> HighTotal: 0 kB
>> HighFree: 0 kB
>> LowTotal: 262144 kB
>> LowFree: 232560 kB
>> SwapTotal: 0 kB
>> SwapFree: 0 kB
>> Dirty: 0 kB
>> Writeback: 0 kB
>> AnonPages: 0 kB
>> Mapped: 0 kB
>> Slab: 0 kB
>> SReclaimable: 0 kB
>> SUnreclaim: 0 kB
>> PageTables: 0 kB
>> NFS_Unstable: 0 kB
>> Bounce: 0 kB
>> WritebackTmp: 0 kB
>> CommitLimit: 0 kB
>> Committed_AS: 0 kB
>> VmallocTotal: 0 kB
>> VmallocUsed: 0 kB
>> VmallocChunk: 0 kB
>> HugePages_Total: 0
>> HugePages_Free: 0
>> HugePages_Rsvd: 0
>> HugePages_Surp: 0
>> Hugepagesize: 2048 kB
>>
>> most of values are 0.
>>
>> I have an question about SwapTotal and SwapFree for LXC.
>> As I thinking that:
>>
>> MemTotal might be: hierarchical_memory_limit
>> MemFree might be: hierarchical_memory_limit - cache
>>
>>
> I am not a memory expert, but isn't MemFree : hierarchical_memory_limit -
> rss ?
>
>> the
>>
>> SwapTotal might be: hierarchical_memsw_limit
>> SwapFree might be: hierarchical_memsw_limit - rss
>>
>> rss - # of bytes of anonymous and swap cache memory
>> I don't know at all that hierarchical_memsw_limit is an good value for
>> swap
>> total, because as I read it is a mem+swap at all.
>>
>> Does the lxc memory.meminfo might look like above? Where can I get the
>> Hugepagesize?
>>
>>
> Right, I agree most of the interesting information to create a
> memory.meminfo is already there in another file and another format. Probably
> some informations in memory.stat can be moved to memory.meminfo and this one
> can be step by step filled with cgroup memory statistic informations. IMO,
> if the memory controller displays memory statistics like a proc/meminfo file
> format, that will make consistency for these informations and make trivial
> the isolation/virtualization with a simple mount-bind.
>
>
>
Hmm..
might be. Right now I am looking for and writing new function in
mm/memcontrol.c file for writing some stats in memory.meminfo file for
tests.
Dirty and ugly part of code, but if it will work as we thought (mount-bind)
and as you wrote above, that will be very simple.
I am going to look how does the /proc/meminfo is doing by the openvz.
mm/memcontrol.c was wrote by xemul from openvz and balbir from ibm.
If I am thinking in the right way, guys from openvz made their own patch for
meminfo based on the mm/memcontrol.c. If I am wrong - where do they taking
meminfo data? :)
--
Krzysztof Taraszka
_______________________________________________
Containers mailing list
Containers at lists.linux-foundation.org
https://lists.linux-foundation.org/mailman/listinfo/containers
More information about the Devel
mailing list