From: Vlastimil Babka <vbabka@suse.cz>
To: Shakeel Butt <shakeel.butt@linux.dev>
Cc: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
Johannes Weiner <hannes@cmpxchg.org>,
Michal Hocko <mhocko@kernel.org>,
Roman Gushchin <roman.gushchin@linux.dev>,
Muchun Song <muchun.song@linux.dev>,
Sebastian Andrzej Siewior <bigeasy@linutronix.de>,
linux-mm@kvack.org, cgroups@vger.kernel.org,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
Meta kernel team <kernel-team@meta.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 7/9] memcg: use __mod_memcg_state in drain_obj_stock
Date: Tue, 18 Mar 2025 09:02:16 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <24a8fa02-6504-4597-a445-a8124919410f@suse.cz> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <6n7rsw565dy4kt7yxmik5kpxdz2b5h2bdsysfvi2rwmvl4juml@npkqfiyzfqua>
On 3/17/25 22:54, Shakeel Butt wrote:
> On Mon, Mar 17, 2025 at 09:56:39PM +0100, Vlastimil Babka wrote:
>> On 3/15/25 18:49, Shakeel Butt wrote:
>> > For non-PREEMPT_RT kernels, drain_obj_stock() is always called with irq
>> > disabled, so we can use __mod_memcg_state() instead of
>> > mod_memcg_state(). For PREEMPT_RT, we need to add memcg_stats_[un]lock
>> > in __mod_memcg_state().
>> >
>> > Signed-off-by: Shakeel Butt <shakeel.butt@linux.dev>
>> > Reviewed-by: Sebastian Andrzej Siewior <bigeasy@linutronix.de>
>>
>> I've asked in the RFC and from Sebastian's answer I think my question was
>> misunderstod, so let me try again.
>>
>> After this patch we'll have from mod_memcg_state():
>>
>> mod_memcg_state()
>> local_irq_save(flags);
>> __mod_memcg_state()
>> memcg_stats_lock(); <- new and unnecessary?
>>
>> Instead of modifying __mod_memcg_state() we could be more targetted and just
>> do in drain_obj_stock():
>>
>> memcg_stats_lock();
>> __mod_memcg_state();
>> memcg_stats_unlock();
>>
>> Am I missing something?
>
> This seems unnecessary because this patch is adding the first user of
> __mod_memcg_state()
You mean first other user than mod_memcg_state() itself.
> but I think maintainability is better with
> memcg_stats_[un]lock() inside __mod_memcg_state().
>
> Let's take the example of __mod_memcg_lruvec_state(). It is being
> called from places where non-RT kernel, the irqs are disabled through
> spin_lock_irq*, so on RT kernel, the irq would not be disabled and
> thus explicitly need preemption disabled. What if in future
> __mod_memcg_state() is being used by a caller which assumes preemption
> is disabled through irq disable. The RT kernel would be buggy there.
>
> I am not sure if it is easy to force the future users to explicitly add
> memcg_stats_[un]lock() across the call to __mod_memcg_state().
I see the point. Well least memcg_stats_lock() isn't expensive, and it's a
no-op on non-debug !RT anyway.
Acked-by: Vlastimil Babka <vbabka@suse.cz>
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2025-03-18 8:02 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 33+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2025-03-15 17:49 [PATCH 0/9] memcg: cleanup per-cpu stock Shakeel Butt
2025-03-15 17:49 ` [PATCH 1/9] memcg: remove root memcg check from refill_stock Shakeel Butt
2025-03-18 0:39 ` Roman Gushchin
2025-03-18 7:59 ` Vlastimil Babka
2025-03-21 16:55 ` Shakeel Butt
2025-03-15 17:49 ` [PATCH 2/9] memcg: decouple drain_obj_stock from local stock Shakeel Butt
2025-03-18 0:44 ` Roman Gushchin
2025-03-15 17:49 ` [PATCH 3/9] memcg: introduce memcg_uncharge Shakeel Butt
2025-03-18 0:50 ` Roman Gushchin
2025-03-15 17:49 ` [PATCH 4/9] memcg: manually inline __refill_stock Shakeel Butt
2025-03-18 0:58 ` Roman Gushchin
2025-03-18 7:58 ` Vlastimil Babka
2025-03-15 17:49 ` [PATCH 5/9] memcg: no refilling stock from obj_cgroup_release Shakeel Butt
2025-03-18 1:06 ` Roman Gushchin
2025-03-15 17:49 ` [PATCH 6/9] memcg: do obj_cgroup_put inside drain_obj_stock Shakeel Butt
2025-03-18 1:07 ` Roman Gushchin
2025-03-15 17:49 ` [PATCH 7/9] memcg: use __mod_memcg_state in drain_obj_stock Shakeel Butt
2025-03-17 20:56 ` Vlastimil Babka
2025-03-17 21:54 ` Shakeel Butt
2025-03-18 8:02 ` Vlastimil Babka [this message]
2025-03-18 1:13 ` Roman Gushchin
2025-03-18 7:50 ` Vlastimil Babka
2025-03-15 17:49 ` [PATCH 8/9] memcg: combine slab obj stock charging and accounting Shakeel Butt
2025-03-18 1:20 ` Roman Gushchin
2025-03-15 17:49 ` [PATCH 9/9] memcg: manually inline replace_stock_objcg Shakeel Butt
2025-03-18 1:21 ` Roman Gushchin
2025-03-18 8:00 ` Vlastimil Babka
2025-03-16 3:57 ` [PATCH 0/9] memcg: cleanup per-cpu stock Andrew Morton
2025-03-16 4:43 ` Shakeel Butt
2025-03-16 15:59 ` Alexei Starovoitov
2025-03-17 18:11 ` Shakeel Butt
2025-03-17 20:27 ` Andrew Morton
2025-04-02 20:40 ` Shakeel Butt
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=24a8fa02-6504-4597-a445-a8124919410f@suse.cz \
--to=vbabka@suse.cz \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=bigeasy@linutronix.de \
--cc=cgroups@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=hannes@cmpxchg.org \
--cc=kernel-team@meta.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
--cc=mhocko@kernel.org \
--cc=muchun.song@linux.dev \
--cc=roman.gushchin@linux.dev \
--cc=shakeel.butt@linux.dev \
/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