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 6D3C2C433F5 for ; Fri, 22 Apr 2022 09:44:18 +0000 (UTC) Received: by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix) id C8D2E6B0075; Fri, 22 Apr 2022 05:44:17 -0400 (EDT) Received: by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix, from userid 40) id C16556B007B; Fri, 22 Apr 2022 05:44:17 -0400 (EDT) X-Delivered-To: int-list-linux-mm@kvack.org Received: by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix, from userid 63042) id A90536B007D; Fri, 22 Apr 2022 05:44:17 -0400 (EDT) X-Delivered-To: linux-mm@kvack.org Received: from relay.hostedemail.com (relay.hostedemail.com [64.99.140.28]) by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 942356B0075 for ; Fri, 22 Apr 2022 05:44:17 -0400 (EDT) Received: from smtpin28.hostedemail.com (a10.router.float.18 [10.200.18.1]) by unirelay07.hostedemail.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4F4A421057 for ; Fri, 22 Apr 2022 09:44:17 +0000 (UTC) X-FDA: 79384029354.28.EF7F5CD Received: from mail-qv1-f42.google.com (mail-qv1-f42.google.com [209.85.219.42]) by imf11.hostedemail.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id E26F54002E for ; Fri, 22 Apr 2022 09:44:14 +0000 (UTC) Received: by mail-qv1-f42.google.com with SMTP id i14so5606762qvk.13 for ; Fri, 22 Apr 2022 02:44:16 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20210112; h=date:from:to:cc:subject:message-id:references:mime-version :content-disposition:in-reply-to; bh=UcveCi2DaIN2/KSCk6hBDKNXuFrosOlo6laoUxh4W9g=; b=Nl0NCVZlpHcgEFTHsNvXnmfaN9kpdjAiLg7axGQJrxeBtLMw5/R03Xf5Tk0MBtLE1J n5A1sSjQEc2LAFnnnVQSBjQlp5tswwF05kglqNyvJIjiic+7pUu3GRiI34mYLcSZxFel hcogw0SQN8aLYXZHnAG1/2mWirNc9rp3en1Wake6MguWKkSuilZ3xOTYKi66K8ISgFJy gHf9JMVmDpHkzP4jEgWdKzufmM/btYHXCyOBhrJMI7NOypKAcXAumRmpwEzsLinPmP7b mOBRoQYbl7O8QG8U/WDilP5bBFEmQPvFjagIRxcvEdhVo2Am7WDe3sekTXm9S/hq4VP/ VesA== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20210112; h=x-gm-message-state:date:from:to:cc:subject:message-id:references :mime-version:content-disposition:in-reply-to; bh=UcveCi2DaIN2/KSCk6hBDKNXuFrosOlo6laoUxh4W9g=; b=lrppH4UNNkR6rsLHQghoCbEgRTQTFiA+qdbwq5q6jFj+Mp4QejNhmdFfVgoPo4yL4X YnUlrCjuWuiBPHuo/U09jcwOJ91QyE9Z9dsu0XnBUZl2wqu09PyTsijbK2ROcSbe16Za wWCp51AvThZwPs14q70XV4uKwAX9HDP4aWRC7FTcHYPmWooShF4aoK0eQFwTgwSEHHR4 04PmIMFZDkNS91RjTZCXjlSo7HIbUC9aDAmyr7Apla7RsTAli6RecBy8SQcrdjYncnZg d9lMwkB+1GJOrWekRjB+ENUaAIzd5ARujf58k5+9zve9jNGzIc7yd9aPAZyGk/sOU8Sm 9+dg== X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM532O8MI0pKhhZOP4XRjRkc09ij20EHsVDefae5oAWyqbEZxCbCej oBXPiSVQeSWgnFoSBH/7AQ== X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJyYfLrGLQNtjreIBelDOsFYXAjNfMntgtcIFvmkDRKUQsrsFpgGCmUtr7v+vz6OLBy7Qr+cQQ== X-Received: by 2002:ad4:5389:0:b0:42e:90eb:1f7d with SMTP id i9-20020ad45389000000b0042e90eb1f7dmr2842265qvv.103.1650620656115; Fri, 22 Apr 2022 02:44:16 -0700 (PDT) Received: from moria.home.lan (c-73-219-103-14.hsd1.vt.comcast.net. [73.219.103.14]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id j12-20020a05622a038c00b002f340aeffb3sm984621qtx.85.2022.04.22.02.44.15 (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 bits=256/256); Fri, 22 Apr 2022 02:44:15 -0700 (PDT) Date: Fri, 22 Apr 2022 05:44:13 -0400 From: Kent Overstreet To: Michal Hocko Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-mm@kvack.org, linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org, roman.gushchin@linux.dev, hannes@cmpxchg.org Subject: Re: [PATCH 3/4] mm: Centralize & improve oom reporting in show_mem.c Message-ID: <20220422094413.2i6dygfpul3toyqr@moria.home.lan> References: <20220419203202.2670193-1-kent.overstreet@gmail.com> <20220419203202.2670193-4-kent.overstreet@gmail.com> <20220420165805.lg4k2iipnpyt4nuu@moria.home.lan> <20220421184213.tbglkeze22xrcmlq@moria.home.lan> <20220422083037.3pjdrusrn54fmfdf@moria.home.lan> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: X-Rspamd-Server: rspam09 X-Rspamd-Queue-Id: E26F54002E X-Rspam-User: Authentication-Results: imf11.hostedemail.com; dkim=pass header.d=gmail.com header.s=20210112 header.b=Nl0NCVZl; dmarc=pass (policy=none) header.from=gmail.com; spf=pass (imf11.hostedemail.com: domain of kent.overstreet@gmail.com designates 209.85.219.42 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=kent.overstreet@gmail.com X-Stat-Signature: 687634pjknab6pgzhkpocpu7h874efi4 X-HE-Tag: 1650620654-223679 X-Bogosity: Ham, tests=bogofilter, spamicity=0.000010, version=1.2.4 Sender: owner-linux-mm@kvack.org Precedence: bulk X-Loop: owner-majordomo@kvack.org List-ID: On Fri, Apr 22, 2022 at 11:27:05AM +0200, Michal Hocko wrote: > We already do that in some form. We dump unreclaimable slabs if they > consume more memory than user pages on LRUs. We also dump all slab > caches with some objects. Why is this approach not good? Should we tweak > the condition to dump or should we limit the dump? These are reasonable > questions to ask. Your patch has dropped those without explaining any > of the motivation. > > I am perfectly OK to modify should_dump_unreclaim_slab to dump even if > the slab memory consumption is lower. Also dumping small caches with > handful of objects can be excessive. > > Wrt to shrinkers I really do not know what kind of shrinkers data would > be useful to dump and when. Therefore I am asking about examples. Look, I've given you the sample output you asked for and explained repeatedly my rationale and you haven't directly responded; if you have a reason you're against the patches please say so, but please give your reasoning.