Re: Path forward for Virtualized Swap?

[Chris Li]

On Wed, Sep 23, 2026 at 6:30 AM Shakeel Butt <shakeel.butt@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>

> > BTW, I already shared that changing swap counter charging will break
> > our and others' existing deployments.
>
> What do you mean here by "break our deployment"? We are talking about
> memory.swap usage and limits here. Google is still on v1 and using memsw
> usage and limit and I don't see how vswap is breaking memsw?

Your information is no longer accurate. I got this from our internal
AI: "While Google's internal production fleet has historically relied
on cgroup v1, there is an active migration to cgroup v2 to align with
the upstream Linux community. Meanwhile, in Google Cloud (especially
Google Kubernetes Engine - GKE), cgroup v2 is already widely deployed
and is the default for newer node pools."

About the V1 to V2 migration, it uses the memory.current and
memory.swap.* counter to simulate the memsw counter for providing the
metrics singal.

> Are you making these false claims just to derail the conversation?

You should apologize for your accusation.

Chris