Re: [PATCH] memcg: sync flush only if periodic flush is delayed

["Michal Koutný" <mkoutny@suse.com>]

Hi 2.

On Sat, Mar 12, 2022 at 07:07:15PM +0000, Shakeel Butt <shakeelb@google.com> wrote:
> It is (b) that I am aiming for in this patch. At least (a) was not
> happening in the cloudflare experiments. Are you suggesting having a
> dedicated high priority wq would solve both (a) and (b)?
> [...]
> > We can't argue what's the effect of periodic only flushing so this
> > newly introduced factor would inherit that too. I find it superfluous.
> 
> 
> Sorry I didn't get your point. What is superfluous?

Let me retell my understanding.
The current implementation flushes based on cumulated error and time.
Your patch proposes conditioning the former with another time-based
flushing, whose duration can be up to 2 times longer than the existing
periodic flush.

Assuming the periodic flush is working, the reader won't see data older
than 2 seconds, so the additional sync-flush after (possible) 4 seconds
seems superfluous.

(In the case of periodic flush being stuck, I thought the factor 2=4s/2s
was superfluous, another magic parameter.)

I'm comparing here your proposal vs no synchronous flushing in
workingset_refault().

> Do you have any strong concerns with the currect patch?

Does that clarify?

(I agree with your initial thesis this can be iterated before it evolves
to everyone's satisfaction.)


Michal