From: Johannes Weiner <hannes@cmpxchg.org>
To: "Michal Koutný" <mkoutny@suse.com>
Cc: Waiman Long <llong@redhat.com>, Michal Hocko <mhocko@kernel.org>,
Roman Gushchin <roman.gushchin@linux.dev>,
Shakeel Butt <shakeel.butt@linux.dev>,
Muchun Song <muchun.song@linux.dev>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
Tejun Heo <tj@kernel.org>, Shuah Khan <shuah@kernel.org>,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, cgroups@vger.kernel.org,
linux-mm@kvack.org, linux-kselftest@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v6 1/2] mm/vmscan: Skip memcg with !usage in shrink_node_memcgs()
Date: Mon, 14 Apr 2025 12:47:21 -0400 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20250414164721.GA741145@cmpxchg.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <uaxa3qttqmaqxsphwukrxdbfrx6px7t4iytjdksuroqiu6w7in@75o4bigysttw>
On Mon, Apr 14, 2025 at 03:55:39PM +0200, Michal Koutný wrote:
> On Mon, Apr 14, 2025 at 09:15:57AM -0400, Waiman Long <llong@redhat.com> wrote:
> > I did see some low event in the no usage case because of the ">=" comparison
> > used in mem_cgroup_below_min().
>
> Do you refer to A/B/E or A/B/F from the test?
> It's OK to see some events if there was non-zero usage initially.
>
> Nevertheless, which situation this patch changes that is not handled by
> mem_cgroup_below_min() already?
It's not a functional change to the protection semantics or the
reclaim behavior.
The problem is if we go into low_reclaim and encounter an empty group,
we'll issue "low-protected group is being reclaimed" events, which is
kind of absurd (nothing will be reclaimed) and thus confusing to users
(I didn't even configure any protection!)
I suggested, instead of redefining the protection definitions for that
special case, to bypass all the checks and the scan count calculations
when we already know the group is empty and none of this applies.
https://lore.kernel.org/linux-mm/20250404181308.GA300138@cmpxchg.org/
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2025-04-14 16:47 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 10+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2025-04-14 2:12 [PATCH v6 0/2] memcg: Fix test_memcg_min/low test failures Waiman Long
2025-04-14 2:12 ` [PATCH v6 1/2] mm/vmscan: Skip memcg with !usage in shrink_node_memcgs() Waiman Long
2025-04-14 12:42 ` Michal Koutný
2025-04-14 13:15 ` Waiman Long
2025-04-14 13:55 ` Michal Koutný
2025-04-14 16:47 ` Johannes Weiner [this message]
2025-04-14 18:01 ` Michal Koutný
2025-04-14 18:10 ` Johannes Weiner
2025-04-14 18:57 ` Waiman Long
2025-04-14 2:12 ` [PATCH v6 2/2] selftests: memcg: Increase error tolerance of child memory.current check in test_memcg_protection() Waiman Long
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20250414164721.GA741145@cmpxchg.org \
--to=hannes@cmpxchg.org \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=cgroups@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kselftest@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
--cc=llong@redhat.com \
--cc=mhocko@kernel.org \
--cc=mkoutny@suse.com \
--cc=muchun.song@linux.dev \
--cc=roman.gushchin@linux.dev \
--cc=shakeel.butt@linux.dev \
--cc=shuah@kernel.org \
--cc=tj@kernel.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox