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 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.2 required=3.0 tests=DKIM_SIGNED,DKIM_VALID, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS, USER_AGENT_SANE_1 autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8C719C432C0 for ; Mon, 25 Nov 2019 14:42:19 +0000 (UTC) Received: from kanga.kvack.org (kanga.kvack.org [205.233.56.17]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4E81120679 for ; Mon, 25 Nov 2019 14:42:19 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=cmpxchg-org.20150623.gappssmtp.com header.i=@cmpxchg-org.20150623.gappssmtp.com header.b="XckVxkZ9" DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.3.2 mail.kernel.org 4E81120679 Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dmarc=fail (p=none dis=none) header.from=cmpxchg.org Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=owner-linux-mm@kvack.org Received: by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix) id D28516B05CD; Mon, 25 Nov 2019 09:42:18 -0500 (EST) Received: by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix, from userid 40) id CE1DB6B05D3; Mon, 25 Nov 2019 09:42:18 -0500 (EST) X-Delivered-To: int-list-linux-mm@kvack.org Received: by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix, from userid 63042) id C15F76B05D4; Mon, 25 Nov 2019 09:42:18 -0500 (EST) X-Delivered-To: linux-mm@kvack.org Received: from forelay.hostedemail.com (smtprelay0159.hostedemail.com [216.40.44.159]) by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id ADE836B05CD for ; Mon, 25 Nov 2019 09:42:18 -0500 (EST) Received: from smtpin09.hostedemail.com (10.5.19.251.rfc1918.com [10.5.19.251]) by forelay05.hostedemail.com (Postfix) with SMTP id 8EFF1181AEF30 for ; Mon, 25 Nov 2019 14:42:18 +0000 (UTC) X-FDA: 76195065156.09.name36_885ae47e2500f X-HE-Tag: name36_885ae47e2500f X-Filterd-Recvd-Size: 4485 Received: from mail-pf1-f195.google.com (mail-pf1-f195.google.com [209.85.210.195]) by imf42.hostedemail.com (Postfix) with ESMTP for ; Mon, 25 Nov 2019 14:42:16 +0000 (UTC) Received: by mail-pf1-f195.google.com with SMTP id d199so2836742pfd.11 for ; Mon, 25 Nov 2019 06:42:16 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=cmpxchg-org.20150623.gappssmtp.com; s=20150623; h=date:from:to:cc:subject:message-id:references:mime-version :content-disposition:in-reply-to:user-agent; bh=lwXGrEOjSqnqZiaQMZLTmg7wMGAOXZmOK9x6ETEDSWc=; b=XckVxkZ99stolnPraL6yAMTu4V3QaYraqDRylH/AMYJb5Ra8ZYEjjRI7teW5O1IDWL sTlUepeNm/0adbdJptu4WjsTiGmc+V+9GiK/OmHJqiHUS7Ce3kh6uHPTSuVu+V3dk5UH WeYNB5W5MT5o4FeImcgf1W0dt/ctIcV2MOPeWy1FUpfmYO2FXKgaASYW/6mSBVCIhvAU clSBSVB/6HHKWIHaV8fKwcsrIp8mHusos4VW6dJYC27/9o0KA5u/e3yIRmwmd1ViCyYY dtyalsTjpBdSnfcHTuIZoHKJ/xsKsiAciLCFt0FY2vsdFZfMfYlpO0dEAOca7ZKTE90x 6ygA== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:date:from:to:cc:subject:message-id:references :mime-version:content-disposition:in-reply-to:user-agent; bh=lwXGrEOjSqnqZiaQMZLTmg7wMGAOXZmOK9x6ETEDSWc=; b=b2Q9BDpsQyIXOrEiAec0nwtU3ClOvJuAAYctXNSDHnqS/tQM5CyIkGdb/ifasa9pIw 5n+rjeCyRMnCWKjVj+t9UqARhZK5DVOa4EwHdlwmf+buwCGr0K65KlmXEA+vOmXu30gZ /A4W+d7PjKLVf2EV8zQwxNHJErTjn8YKE25OnEjnZXT7pNimRiJllT1Vle+rjDMBYDBO 1EI34oxbD8fruk1t33MHB8zfjD5T43QJw5RvLYp4aC8Vh5ydcPO6cmmuwiD88K+o+lV1 bGlkFelhkQcSGBbgexdMTAnskag7sbiLWz6fhSqikEo84yfc6Bl1TGAM9FbJ+kpJ6YVI gh5w== X-Gm-Message-State: APjAAAWOzVqjvKAiEy0wyufOnhB2yixEPF4FyhPzreYJAgt2dDF4Tvx3 Q7h1noKYcy4WzwS8Y5dOXY7jww== X-Google-Smtp-Source: APXvYqzNmCrWoOt6cEjbpTuwk8fdY8jkTlqm9U+hjfbz0ektdr4eE4dXuoxaj77qOR1Z2JyWIeOobA== X-Received: by 2002:a62:606:: with SMTP id 6mr34702209pfg.76.1574692935687; Mon, 25 Nov 2019 06:42:15 -0800 (PST) Received: from localhost ([2620:10d:c090:180::71c0]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id u3sm8753182pgp.51.2019.11.25.06.42.14 (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 bits=256/256); Mon, 25 Nov 2019 06:42:14 -0800 (PST) Date: Mon, 25 Nov 2019 09:42:13 -0500 From: Johannes Weiner To: Michal Hocko Cc: Yafang Shao , Vladimir Davydov , Andrew Morton , Linux MM Subject: Re: [PATCH] mm, memcg: clear page protection when memcg oom group happens Message-ID: <20191125144213.GB602168@cmpxchg.org> References: <1574676893-1571-1-git-send-email-laoar.shao@gmail.com> <20191125110848.GH31714@dhcp22.suse.cz> <20191125115409.GJ31714@dhcp22.suse.cz> <20191125123123.GL31714@dhcp22.suse.cz> <20191125124553.GM31714@dhcp22.suse.cz> <20191125142150.GP31714@dhcp22.suse.cz> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20191125142150.GP31714@dhcp22.suse.cz> User-Agent: Mutt/1.12.2 (2019-09-21) 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 Mon, Nov 25, 2019 at 03:21:50PM +0100, Michal Hocko wrote: > On Mon 25-11-19 22:11:15, Yafang Shao wrote: > > When there're no processes, we don't need to protect the pages. You > > can consider it as 'fault tolerance' . > > I have already tried to explain why this is a bold statement that > doesn't really hold universally and that the kernel doesn't really have > enough information to make an educated guess. I agree, this is not obviously true. And the kernel shouldn't try to guess whether the explicit userspace configuration is still desirable to userspace or not. Should we also delete the cgroup when it becomes empty for example? It's better to implement these kinds of policy decisions from userspace. There is a cgroup.events file that can be polled, and its "populated" field shows conveniently whether there are tasks in a subtree or not. You can use that to clear protection settings.