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=-1.0 required=3.0 tests=MAILING_LIST_MULTI, SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS 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 5FF0EC33CA1 for ; Mon, 20 Jan 2020 21:27:36 +0000 (UTC) Received: from kanga.kvack.org (kanga.kvack.org [205.233.56.17]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2C47122525 for ; Mon, 20 Jan 2020 21:27:36 +0000 (UTC) DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.3.2 mail.kernel.org 2C47122525 Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dmarc=fail (p=none dis=none) header.from=kernel.org Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=owner-linux-mm@kvack.org Received: by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix) id AB3B56B06A2; Mon, 20 Jan 2020 16:27:35 -0500 (EST) Received: by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix, from userid 40) id A64B96B06A3; Mon, 20 Jan 2020 16:27:35 -0500 (EST) X-Delivered-To: int-list-linux-mm@kvack.org Received: by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix, from userid 63042) id 92CBB6B06A4; Mon, 20 Jan 2020 16:27:35 -0500 (EST) X-Delivered-To: linux-mm@kvack.org Received: from forelay.hostedemail.com (smtprelay0066.hostedemail.com [216.40.44.66]) by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7BEE76B06A2 for ; Mon, 20 Jan 2020 16:27:35 -0500 (EST) Received: from smtpin02.hostedemail.com (10.5.19.251.rfc1918.com [10.5.19.251]) by forelay03.hostedemail.com (Postfix) with SMTP id 126828248047 for ; Mon, 20 Jan 2020 21:27:35 +0000 (UTC) X-FDA: 76399299270.02.root22_5f3ef8714311f X-HE-Tag: root22_5f3ef8714311f X-Filterd-Recvd-Size: 5038 Received: from mail-wr1-f46.google.com (mail-wr1-f46.google.com [209.85.221.46]) by imf49.hostedemail.com (Postfix) with ESMTP for ; Mon, 20 Jan 2020 21:27:34 +0000 (UTC) Received: by mail-wr1-f46.google.com with SMTP id j42so973381wrj.12 for ; Mon, 20 Jan 2020 13:27:34 -0800 (PST) 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; bh=xRMZlrNlQg9cdO4fRMxM7tI9dWMAzyGA31Iy64N3nl8=; b=fpPm9YXslgn4WCmu9ukU2ik8/xQVIdpMvCCNI8/tzlEliBQO0vbiH6ErkqgfGb4pGw VLvHIRNJisdbYY1QY+6Q+KkbzAQxDijaGnMzYaSSQZqi/5OivJsuR3MBPNPDwqiEybvi c2vnHo2kV8Bz5yKTDBvGiNTI+Xwl1SV3NXUcEzbBKpibd/6AWEYhwClrF75/av1kzXqf XNzfJJb7GBq/1byr0rmoCt84qlyGDsBUVB01fpOEQtCI0Hd75T7Xs2ZMm0O1mmF+XK7z cIrdRqA1YieJfwn8ZdPgdEFeILr8wfHKlBuohbz1wOLuQrPyqVpK2VtuKPS+YYbpuvz3 P4HQ== X-Gm-Message-State: APjAAAUZgcgyWU1ex2WAVe9jYSyCUH2phntf0E6PhRsGkCdsyK4Mjxn+ +B5zRddDiH6lu/oZniR8dCc= X-Google-Smtp-Source: APXvYqyYgz2mI0koULHiATO7/pyVqYlpiyljM7jza7dSiOuNS5UDLDHVm+KJL6g9yjj9NKtYMqDKWw== X-Received: by 2002:adf:d0c1:: with SMTP id z1mr1443832wrh.371.1579555653420; Mon, 20 Jan 2020 13:27:33 -0800 (PST) Received: from localhost (ip-37-188-245-167.eurotel.cz. [37.188.245.167]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id v83sm939560wmg.16.2020.01.20.13.27.30 (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 bits=256/256); Mon, 20 Jan 2020 13:27:32 -0800 (PST) Date: Mon, 20 Jan 2020 22:27:26 +0100 From: Michal Hocko To: David Rientjes Cc: Andrew Morton , Wei Yang , hannes@cmpxchg.org, vdavydov.dev@gmail.com, ktkhai@virtuozzo.com, kirill.shutemov@linux.intel.com, yang.shi@linux.alibaba.com, cgroups@vger.kernel.org, linux-mm@kvack.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, alexander.duyck@gmail.com, stable@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [Patch v4] mm: thp: remove the defer list related code since this will not happen Message-ID: <20200120212726.GB29276@dhcp22.suse.cz> References: <20200117233836.3434-1-richardw.yang@linux.intel.com> <20200118145421.0ab96d5d9bea21a3339d52fe@linux-foundation.org> <20200120072237.GA18451@dhcp22.suse.cz> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: 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 20-01-20 13:10:56, David Rientjes wrote: > On Mon, 20 Jan 2020, Michal Hocko wrote: > > > > When migrating memcg charges of thp memory, there are two possibilities: > > > > > > (1) The underlying compound page is mapped by a pmd and thus does is not > > > on a deferred split queue (it's mapped), or > > > > > > (2) The compound page is not mapped by a pmd and is awaiting split on a > > > deferred split queue. > > > > > > The current charge migration implementation does *not* migrate charges for > > > thp memory on the deferred split queue, it only migrates charges for pages > > > that are mapped by a pmd. > > > > > > Thus, to migrate charges, the underlying compound page cannot be on a > > > deferred split queue; no list manipulation needs to be done in > > > mem_cgroup_move_account(). > > > > > > With the current code, the underlying compound page is moved to the > > > deferred split queue of the memcg its memory is not charged to, so > > > susbequent reclaim will consider these pages for the wrong memcg. Remove > > > the deferred split queue handling in mem_cgroup_move_account() entirely. > > > > I believe this still doesn't describe the underlying problem to the full > > extent. What happens with the page on the deferred list when it > > shouldn't be there in fact? Unless I am missing something deferred_split_scan > > will simply split that huge page. Which is a bit unfortunate but nothing > > really critical. This should be mentioned in the changelog. > > > > Are you referring to a compound page on the deferred split queue before a > task is moved? I'm not sure this is within the scope of Wei's patch.. > this is simply preventing a page from being moved to the deferred split > queue of a memcg that it is not charged to. Is there a concern about why > this code can be removed or a suggestion on something else it should be > doing instead? No, I do not have any concern about the patch itslef. It is that the changelog doesn't decribe the user visible effect. All I am saying is that the current code splits THPs of moved pages under memory pressure even if that is not needed. And that is a clear bug. -- Michal Hocko SUSE Labs