From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org Received: from kanga.kvack.org (kanga.kvack.org [205.233.56.17]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 36709C3DA50 for ; Thu, 17 Aug 2023 16:45:52 +0000 (UTC) Received: by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix) id 536A5940041; Thu, 17 Aug 2023 12:45:51 -0400 (EDT) Received: by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix, from userid 40) id 4E5FA940009; Thu, 17 Aug 2023 12:45:51 -0400 (EDT) X-Delivered-To: int-list-linux-mm@kvack.org Received: by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix, from userid 63042) id 3AD89940041; Thu, 17 Aug 2023 12:45:51 -0400 (EDT) X-Delivered-To: linux-mm@kvack.org Received: from relay.hostedemail.com (smtprelay0017.hostedemail.com [216.40.44.17]) by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2914A940009 for ; Thu, 17 Aug 2023 12:45:51 -0400 (EDT) Received: from smtpin10.hostedemail.com (a10.router.float.18 [10.200.18.1]) by unirelay07.hostedemail.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id EEFB316077A for ; Thu, 17 Aug 2023 16:45:50 +0000 (UTC) X-FDA: 81134173260.10.2FB49ED Received: from us-smtp-delivery-124.mimecast.com (us-smtp-delivery-124.mimecast.com [170.10.129.124]) by imf24.hostedemail.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id DAA88180025 for ; Thu, 17 Aug 2023 16:45:48 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: imf24.hostedemail.com; dkim=pass header.d=redhat.com header.s=mimecast20190719 header.b=jAdGgx0L; spf=pass (imf24.hostedemail.com: domain of longman@redhat.com designates 170.10.129.124 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=longman@redhat.com; dmarc=pass (policy=none) header.from=redhat.com ARC-Message-Signature: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=hostedemail.com; s=arc-20220608; t=1692290749; h=from:from:sender:reply-to:subject:subject:date:date: message-id:message-id:to:to:cc:cc:mime-version:mime-version: content-type:content-type: content-transfer-encoding:content-transfer-encoding: in-reply-to:in-reply-to:references:references:dkim-signature; bh=EMYB6Aa88h1ABn1kG37sttadyKX0sLxsWeo4W40AHWI=; b=5LVhVJAyQbdkCkYuM84rJRGnO4KmfTzlppdUo2CrKxgDgKl88NrHiThe4hAeJmv7Umjvjx Gx0JbuSxfTn7pJJUdy5iGngVKNirjjCkg1GBdO8ZEGOxvflQdaYih3lW3W9ESlFBYuRcd+ T+n+3vTQ/fHqChYRQLIeoxjPm1/KRzM= ARC-Seal: i=1; s=arc-20220608; d=hostedemail.com; t=1692290749; a=rsa-sha256; cv=none; b=pJ9FCw0ZVrvhXH37NwqYBV8pLA21g6i4w0oWzEp6eVgc3X+7ltJpKrwKbY05ZwQfufxED1 SPOigLXUvbyjmrdUrGLOtI7FXDM7g06xvB7MpQVjbsv81Bgtg/K3Qa/zyt5bAMzYrGWY/b iVH4Mno7UZ0QGxnLUHZSj845KujPBZQ= ARC-Authentication-Results: i=1; imf24.hostedemail.com; dkim=pass header.d=redhat.com header.s=mimecast20190719 header.b=jAdGgx0L; spf=pass (imf24.hostedemail.com: domain of longman@redhat.com designates 170.10.129.124 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=longman@redhat.com; dmarc=pass (policy=none) header.from=redhat.com DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=redhat.com; s=mimecast20190719; t=1692290748; h=from:from:reply-to:subject:subject:date:date:message-id:message-id: to:to:cc:cc:mime-version:mime-version:content-type:content-type: content-transfer-encoding:content-transfer-encoding: in-reply-to:in-reply-to:references:references; bh=EMYB6Aa88h1ABn1kG37sttadyKX0sLxsWeo4W40AHWI=; b=jAdGgx0LRWhvNObkUL98YU4pzCMemWpjhXVMCl3dGob4mTnb6QGg20QSMoQP5PGW5DWx+r 6NLyPB6xy44dPIHqq7TpBy0fYedZtdaLDHNUr1yFTjIEebhJeThJdD2gPRlFa1/IDKBKjH 5VFjW8PR2JVYCJudcgIJGYLQSlXx2CA= Received: from mimecast-mx02.redhat.com (mimecast-mx02.redhat.com [66.187.233.88]) by relay.mimecast.com with ESMTP with STARTTLS (version=TLSv1.2, cipher=TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_256_GCM_SHA384) id us-mta-645-OlgnDsRfM5yPWAcN0xI3sg-1; Thu, 17 Aug 2023 12:45:44 -0400 X-MC-Unique: OlgnDsRfM5yPWAcN0xI3sg-1 Received: from smtp.corp.redhat.com (int-mx08.intmail.prod.int.rdu2.redhat.com [10.11.54.8]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mimecast-mx02.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id B63C6801CF3; Thu, 17 Aug 2023 16:45:43 +0000 (UTC) Received: from [10.22.16.215] (unknown [10.22.16.215]) by smtp.corp.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 644A1C15BAD; Thu, 17 Aug 2023 16:45:43 +0000 (UTC) Message-ID: <0aa69b7b-8955-f495-0026-8c83597a4739@redhat.com> Date: Thu, 17 Aug 2023 12:45:43 -0400 MIME-Version: 1.0 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:102.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/102.7.1 Subject: Re: [PATCH v4] mm: oom: introduce cpuset oom Content-Language: en-US To: Gang Li , Michal Hocko Cc: cgroups@vger.kernel.org, linux-mm@kvack.org, rientjes@google.com, Zefan Li , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org References: <20230411065816.9798-1-ligang.bdlg@bytedance.com> <9ba0de31-b9b8-fb10-011e-b24e9dba5ccd@linux.dev> From: Waiman Long In-Reply-To: <9ba0de31-b9b8-fb10-011e-b24e9dba5ccd@linux.dev> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Scanned-By: MIMEDefang 3.1 on 10.11.54.8 X-Rspamd-Queue-Id: DAA88180025 X-Rspam-User: X-Rspamd-Server: rspam11 X-Stat-Signature: qebuikr1orc14wca4b7frqq6yfauxdgb X-HE-Tag: 1692290748-965886 X-HE-Meta: U2FsdGVkX18JRtgZpLwlTAIE+BMP97xPiKbWbvDjiP7SxA8tRt5ZDzv5Sgh9/zr9AZRxlvIp6rftdiy3djSLrQuYlBorS2h3xCStPFIHiReU8438o0tWs4yTjIAMdku3dR2QE0EofjBpMbQdCYEyUIRT39udmgRWcRsQm6POz633jaj/xf+/BxtrugJj5YJ8II7VN++3FaSvCOWAjmv2YzIW2zIiEkcGxZd4wdEjpZeUr2J6nXfHxNiqyFdI47jvunWC7ZZjuoE87Fsv4XL2bLdlGpC+0H6C9L5nEy41UviXstXo+tEJYO5ZLAPAz1dsINBpvPH+98gLued5WRYjpR8DiGH4LDKxrPFE576Gh4QALRiiB3jgS7D8MfgxFjhFdqauCwYkTjuHlKs2AyKJSHUHl66KZztOO1pevb1t0ZP6YhygPut5kilvMJC870uQDRktEbQECdk0MOw9sUakNU9tmMD0LHVvFhRveqTN4zdqvsrr9hQ2SeSA7q9Te/+5TbVX7aAcIIbwH7H+pQkKuD+gdJ+63KUcfoVGKI641SeVqm0suE2Lb+puh6s3fq4ippk62tr03ZYv7l/ek4wUqGt8PQnP7BZ4qH+NyCzx2JYs4srEEDAYVtV+2zNYyTKDb4D4074pqWUuqPPWMmOcEEh4ERoIoQwARmjf1H00PY0EbO+mqzMgV1AlK8gI3BYBNoMlwkWzvEuwLf9Ngt8MrIRwulKmR0qkisf7I10f3Douqaepq1dGY/ArbeP6m5YLs6z5Dimld9b+KvB8uZt1D/M3b6/R0k0905Jjnu1lpCIERc0hybtOxGPTFspaVgPRO4oPUrRyxBPfD1idea7og0D5QSZyM+qD6FV1VnoXF/BN8jDKynmd9tK8McAEGMM45Yqxu6GfidUyCws6sDeUwOf30+7xd30FEQXM71vz1ESajjp7QKNTmgruKVA4HOeg+vvxxFzGv827NNXBuNG yiLqVb29 YvIc6j/z8GLaYQogYWUQxyCSaRGMZJ/BVIhnlKsaiDHvC8TmWsoFqMcDELe0D3FwlPTANPb61XDVsHsaozcemKf/B+fITujVFU5BIchsFO2ACHDAnsKw247y3gZ/HtW5jAnOXHhv6HZ/qm4RrAFcZIAuAL2T9aWV7EPNr X-Bogosity: Ham, tests=bogofilter, spamicity=0.000000, version=1.2.4 Sender: owner-linux-mm@kvack.org Precedence: bulk X-Loop: owner-majordomo@kvack.org List-ID: On 8/17/23 04:40, Gang Li wrote: > > Since __GFP_HARDWALL is set as long as cpuset is enabled, I think we can > use it to determine if we are under the constraint of CPUSET. > > But I have a question: Why we always set __GFP_HARDWALL when cpuset is > enabled, regardless of the value of cpuset.mem_hardwall? There is no direct dependency between cpuset.mem_hardwall and the __GFP_HARDWALL flag. When cpuset is enabled, all user memory allocation should be subjected to the cpuset memory constraint. In the case of non-user memory allocation, it can fall back to to the node mask of an ancestor up to the root cgroup, i.e. all memory nodes. cpuset.mem_hardwall enables a barrier to this upward search. Note that cpuset.mem_hardwall is a v1 feature that is not available in cgroup v2. Cheers, Longman