linux-mm.kvack.org archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Johannes Weiner <hannes@cmpxchg.org>
To: Chen Ridong <chenridong@huaweicloud.com>
Cc: mhocko@kernel.org, roman.gushchin@linux.dev,
	shakeel.butt@linux.dev, muchun.song@linux.dev,
	akpm@linux-foundation.org, axelrasmussen@google.com,
	yuanchu@google.com, weixugc@google.com, david@kernel.org,
	zhengqi.arch@bytedance.com, lorenzo.stoakes@oracle.com,
	cgroups@vger.kernel.org, linux-mm@kvack.org,
	linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, lujialin4@huawei.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH -next v2 2/2] memcg: remove mem_cgroup_size()
Date: Wed, 10 Dec 2025 11:36:34 -0500	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20251210163634.GB643576@cmpxchg.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20251210071142.2043478-3-chenridong@huaweicloud.com>

On Wed, Dec 10, 2025 at 07:11:42AM +0000, Chen Ridong wrote:
> From: Chen Ridong <chenridong@huawei.com>
> 
> The mem_cgroup_size helper is used only in apply_proportional_protection
> to read the current memory usage. Its semantics are unclear and
> inconsistent with other sites, which directly call page_counter_read for
> the same purpose.
> 
> Remove this helper and replace its usage with page_counter_read for
> clarity. Additionally, rename the local variable 'cgroup_size' to 'usage'
> to better reflect its meaning.

+1

I don't think the helper adds much.

> --- a/mm/vmscan.c
> +++ b/mm/vmscan.c
> @@ -2451,6 +2451,7 @@ static inline void calculate_pressure_balance(struct scan_control *sc,
>  static unsigned long apply_proportional_protection(struct mem_cgroup *memcg,
>  		struct scan_control *sc, unsigned long scan)
>  {
> +#ifdef CONFIG_MEMCG
>  	unsigned long min, low;
>  
>  	mem_cgroup_protection(sc->target_mem_cgroup, memcg, &min, &low);
> @@ -2485,7 +2486,7 @@ static unsigned long apply_proportional_protection(struct mem_cgroup *memcg,
>  		 * again by how much of the total memory used is under
>  		 * hard protection.
>  		 */
> -		unsigned long cgroup_size = mem_cgroup_size(memcg);
> +		unsigned long usage = page_counter_read(&memcg->memory);
>  		unsigned long protection;
>  
>  		/* memory.low scaling, make sure we retry before OOM */
> @@ -2497,9 +2498,9 @@ static unsigned long apply_proportional_protection(struct mem_cgroup *memcg,
>  		}
>  
>  		/* Avoid TOCTOU with earlier protection check */
> -		cgroup_size = max(cgroup_size, protection);
> +		usage = max(usage, protection);
>  
> -		scan -= scan * protection / (cgroup_size + 1);
> +		scan -= scan * protection / (usage + 1);
>  
>  		/*
>  		 * Minimally target SWAP_CLUSTER_MAX pages to keep
> @@ -2508,6 +2509,7 @@ static unsigned long apply_proportional_protection(struct mem_cgroup *memcg,
>  		 */
>  		scan = max(scan, SWAP_CLUSTER_MAX);
>  	}
> +#endif

To avoid the ifdef, how about making it

	bool mem_cgroup_protection(root, memcg, &min, &low, &usage)

and branch the scaling on that return value. The compiler should be
able to eliminate the entire branch in the !CONFIG_MEMCG case. And it
keeps a cleaner split between memcg logic and reclaim logic.


  parent reply	other threads:[~2025-12-10 16:36 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 11+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2025-12-10  7:11 [PATCH -next v2 0/2] memcg cleanups Chen Ridong
2025-12-10  7:11 ` [PATCH -next v2 1/2] memcg: move mem_cgroup_usage memcontrol-v1.c Chen Ridong
2025-12-10  8:01   ` Michal Hocko
2025-12-10 16:28   ` Johannes Weiner
2025-12-10  7:11 ` [PATCH -next v2 2/2] memcg: remove mem_cgroup_size() Chen Ridong
2025-12-10  8:05   ` Michal Hocko
2025-12-10  8:31     ` Chen Ridong
2025-12-10  8:37       ` Michal Hocko
2025-12-10  8:42     ` Chen Ridong
2025-12-10 16:36   ` Johannes Weiner [this message]
2025-12-11  0:43     ` Chen Ridong

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=20251210163634.GB643576@cmpxchg.org \
    --to=hannes@cmpxchg.org \
    --cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
    --cc=axelrasmussen@google.com \
    --cc=cgroups@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=chenridong@huaweicloud.com \
    --cc=david@kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
    --cc=lorenzo.stoakes@oracle.com \
    --cc=lujialin4@huawei.com \
    --cc=mhocko@kernel.org \
    --cc=muchun.song@linux.dev \
    --cc=roman.gushchin@linux.dev \
    --cc=shakeel.butt@linux.dev \
    --cc=weixugc@google.com \
    --cc=yuanchu@google.com \
    --cc=zhengqi.arch@bytedance.com \
    /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