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 489F8C36010 for ; Sat, 5 Apr 2025 18:52:12 +0000 (UTC) Received: by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix) id 5977C6B0006; Sat, 5 Apr 2025 14:52:10 -0400 (EDT) Received: by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix, from userid 40) id 544456B0008; Sat, 5 Apr 2025 14:52:10 -0400 (EDT) X-Delivered-To: int-list-linux-mm@kvack.org Received: by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix, from userid 63042) id 3E4FA6B000A; Sat, 5 Apr 2025 14:52:10 -0400 (EDT) X-Delivered-To: linux-mm@kvack.org Received: from relay.hostedemail.com (smtprelay0010.hostedemail.com [216.40.44.10]) by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1F65A6B0006 for ; Sat, 5 Apr 2025 14:52:10 -0400 (EDT) Received: from smtpin29.hostedemail.com (a10.router.float.18 [10.200.18.1]) by unirelay10.hostedemail.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id DBF0CC158B for ; Sat, 5 Apr 2025 18:52:10 +0000 (UTC) X-FDA: 83300885220.29.2563BB2 Received: from us-smtp-delivery-124.mimecast.com (us-smtp-delivery-124.mimecast.com [170.10.129.124]) by imf28.hostedemail.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 89CBBC000B for ; Sat, 5 Apr 2025 18:52:08 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: imf28.hostedemail.com; dkim=pass header.d=redhat.com header.s=mimecast20190719 header.b=G3fGF0oz; spf=pass (imf28.hostedemail.com: domain of llong@redhat.com designates 170.10.129.124 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=llong@redhat.com; dmarc=pass (policy=quarantine) header.from=redhat.com ARC-Message-Signature: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=hostedemail.com; s=arc-20220608; t=1743879128; h=from:from:sender:reply-to:subject:subject:date:date: message-id:message-id:to:to:cc:cc:mime-version:mime-version: content-type:content-type: content-transfer-encoding:content-transfer-encoding: in-reply-to:in-reply-to:references:references:dkim-signature; bh=Zl94fjucYs05RLWzioyJn3c96IDAkKlAGNSFTZYapG4=; b=PDeD0aO3z6omRAqprgwe8B6tuv5tDy6G+AWjKkDz604C/h127hjTGc3kBoHfzTcRb73v9S 1Zc1m0xF+74mXpDI8VRBPvj46ej8ElOS8pEA/4P28RONCu2k5ogHppS3pGCrw1dap9iQcb Q3tvUIus2agdetmY2zaD2KmK49z0TG0= ARC-Authentication-Results: i=1; imf28.hostedemail.com; dkim=pass header.d=redhat.com header.s=mimecast20190719 header.b=G3fGF0oz; spf=pass (imf28.hostedemail.com: domain of llong@redhat.com designates 170.10.129.124 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=llong@redhat.com; dmarc=pass (policy=quarantine) header.from=redhat.com ARC-Seal: i=1; s=arc-20220608; d=hostedemail.com; t=1743879128; a=rsa-sha256; cv=none; b=4lxsTpY9t93bpz57F6zeltw5P04vnqRaU7AZUvuwv+5g0ssD7pBu1mCLGZ0fJNnQ6vPJp7 ZQaT4k5nHklsyElVBZa6yStjq0lZav9TKAJXd15r1RRklKzFcpXJ/hW0YjMWhKw5RNRL6v OwkUgJN1+nNK/H2At1j6zNLdixPC+HA= DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=redhat.com; s=mimecast20190719; t=1743879128; h=from:from:reply-to:subject:subject:date:date:message-id:message-id: to:to:cc:cc:mime-version:mime-version:content-type:content-type: content-transfer-encoding:content-transfer-encoding: in-reply-to:in-reply-to:references:references; bh=Zl94fjucYs05RLWzioyJn3c96IDAkKlAGNSFTZYapG4=; b=G3fGF0ozT/FWNAW+zopoKvo0I9LuGbv1RDewLsh4DTaMxkflO5wqJEDtUAubyYeSZiD1uK EgEKztJP/y/i+kbacCb0STTglwZt3c89LesWtG7XLFhVsDGgN0q2/r0MI1Ye6dAvPeY1bm gsrTKLgCh22HK2Gwlo1JPdKW7mKehfg= Received: from mail-qk1-f199.google.com (mail-qk1-f199.google.com [209.85.222.199]) by relay.mimecast.com with ESMTP with STARTTLS (version=TLSv1.3, cipher=TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384) id us-mta-177-i7BVZGRkNAm8jGgsfOikfQ-1; Sat, 05 Apr 2025 14:52:06 -0400 X-MC-Unique: i7BVZGRkNAm8jGgsfOikfQ-1 X-Mimecast-MFC-AGG-ID: i7BVZGRkNAm8jGgsfOikfQ_1743879126 Received: by mail-qk1-f199.google.com with SMTP id af79cd13be357-7c5d9d8890fso788697385a.1 for ; Sat, 05 Apr 2025 11:52:06 -0700 (PDT) X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20230601; t=1743879126; x=1744483926; h=content-transfer-encoding:in-reply-to:content-language:references :cc:to:subject:user-agent:mime-version:date:message-id:from :x-gm-message-state:from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:reply-to; bh=Zl94fjucYs05RLWzioyJn3c96IDAkKlAGNSFTZYapG4=; b=SWTZU0sfFvmvntmLILRDs0V9f8OkyXswxJAeVsD2WyKglbjQNFn9WgYRLi01ZiLzgc LhoGdkOCtwSsHohvjCf1U4gn5fXe4xwyMokg0BvLNpYDOl9kICUjRkNtbyrMf4NTEZP0 rd8ry6D3OHVyn5Z8JGQG/4IHjVjLvV5UraKoP8EWKmkK1Hj69oM3eiBAmReVbS4euYcz xPVV0iJ0oI26aUpMFg2Q1MTzb4RojycTP/semvNx+wnU3OxkyLYBKwvxX1uNBcRdPy9z XIOioOzJS1xX0i8aoLl/09YJ7wP4twoy0ZBLRMTEOZfgbzwLgaULsekN3pN8wJbQ4Fia p9dQ== X-Forwarded-Encrypted: i=1; AJvYcCUVsMLM/OUIY430xKuVKNDORdoSbwiL0mi9cUrHyXX9e7gSwt1l8J+fRFuWJQkiFvfeUL9uMIdryQ==@kvack.org X-Gm-Message-State: AOJu0YzpR1HrQNYUkVCxiI6PLGq9OFdlDHmwZjuEtJLSHOtzc5QR3jSK apWIJg3E/GYCTs2sT4NdVOIzvCiGu3grgEhpDIDnJ/Td8ZneFUGYTNMGQb/mf7Rf1AdwmpSR8nE ds6kZnqluUz83nPbcn1LeXfF3EtHb+6YQXi4PkK2nAxAm9kpb X-Gm-Gg: ASbGnctcjlSf+5noxtiEPshw+NIGMCH5JzZcY/Wh3m7MjrcwD0yqnio4dqrwyjkWyaM 51V3+TE4TilICyFSrIm+OW7tCslEQ6kzbSCELY5ECcmmoks4v+6/9coLHfZeQI3bYlwDAmEzBDP 07t0EKNS+WnjMZyrODbBEcbDJ/7PdOibosUc9rp4021u5C55weLd7m4qiZYewAni0o2z3iS2WPm bKPNlNs2ortwFpngFwZlt27SZaeLk7+ZqzhUvF84hj1QO1KwWd/YCAXVETQNHzR5UjF+m+oUGGt WqWyWdAzpnm6g3P0D6xEOpDNiBDaC5BmmD9D/hvM3qOyJ6+B70CK0y9nyH4u7Q== X-Received: by 2002:a05:620a:2891:b0:7c3:dd2d:c0e2 with SMTP id af79cd13be357-7c76c98f69dmr1949212685a.13.1743879126145; Sat, 05 Apr 2025 11:52:06 -0700 (PDT) X-Google-Smtp-Source: AGHT+IGkQV+pEi+TmbqcIT9YnR48A7CUH0qtIrkXsV397pZvj687wq1qfmiwok5il5SMAFPR0p8RYA== X-Received: by 2002:a05:620a:2891:b0:7c3:dd2d:c0e2 with SMTP id af79cd13be357-7c76c98f69dmr1949210485a.13.1743879125856; Sat, 05 Apr 2025 11:52:05 -0700 (PDT) Received: from ?IPV6:2601:188:c100:5710:315f:57b3:b997:5fca? ([2601:188:c100:5710:315f:57b3:b997:5fca]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id af79cd13be357-7c76e968c1fsm371472485a.52.2025.04.05.11.52.04 (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_128_GCM_SHA256 bits=128/128); Sat, 05 Apr 2025 11:52:05 -0700 (PDT) From: Waiman Long X-Google-Original-From: Waiman Long Message-ID: <6712624c-c798-4ccf-afc1-6dfc9efc4b5e@redhat.com> Date: Sat, 5 Apr 2025 14:52:04 -0400 MIME-Version: 1.0 User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 1/2] memcg: Don't generate low/min events if either low/min or elow/emin is 0 To: Johannes Weiner , Waiman Long Cc: Tejun Heo , Michal Hocko , Roman Gushchin , Shakeel Butt , Muchun Song , Andrew Morton , =?UTF-8?Q?Michal_Koutn=C3=BD?= , Shuah Khan , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, cgroups@vger.kernel.org, linux-mm@kvack.org, linux-kselftest@vger.kernel.org References: <20250404012435.656045-1-longman@redhat.com> <1ac51e8e-8dc0-4cd8-9414-f28125061bb3@redhat.com> <20250404181308.GA300138@cmpxchg.org> <20250404193802.GA373778@cmpxchg.org> In-Reply-To: <20250404193802.GA373778@cmpxchg.org> X-Mimecast-Spam-Score: 0 X-Mimecast-MFC-PROC-ID: MFiDxZtiOt2Ob_Wdyvm0zidYY0jI26_xBi734ZZxdmo_1743879126 X-Mimecast-Originator: redhat.com Content-Language: en-US Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-Rspamd-Queue-Id: 89CBBC000B X-Stat-Signature: 14as7pfx8uugds1ki4qccm9dxmbr7sm9 X-Rspam-User: X-Rspamd-Server: rspam12 X-HE-Tag: 1743879128-986250 X-HE-Meta: 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 HMKdse9a jblMiHGZHdJtSJT264VDxYIpTIYw5Aa1T97w86YNJSPo9Pc3sXG9V0fob3aPgD/Ci7MY9csMdr3k51sK4eprwBbUampeT8rC0LQJ2d4LJpaepNEZkhItgHhhHdYS/9IKFBJ6UDsKjEuzADPaH0I4DmVA0kTPNelRJJgMdpPpzcOkoflHBZMspkxLvPGeceX5fic22Fre7HclevULYJF1X/R2hOItJ4AZne14vgR7V557NxdC/MyZxyO12qtKXOmWqrMAdRc3Jil+j6z6jsnCTSxrsxUreg8LVu1w69HZxk9WrEH/fI6rGv47vmbbJgb4ax7dUP0fzlXKKajPC8Axsh6hzfpx4pdQvSk/fwb7wodtbypL9dTtcAIKthPruDB9qFceVK9OpEty7/7/TcYEPYF5E0G3AoO+WA6JLYAsqyoTxJy5vdU+n865UZD026nAthqUY+AYZ3sRn378= X-Bogosity: Ham, tests=bogofilter, spamicity=0.000000, version=1.2.4 Sender: owner-linux-mm@kvack.org Precedence: bulk X-Loop: owner-majordomo@kvack.org List-ID: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: On 4/4/25 3:38 PM, Johannes Weiner wrote: > On Fri, Apr 04, 2025 at 02:55:35PM -0400, Waiman Long wrote: >> On 4/4/25 2:13 PM, Johannes Weiner wrote: >>> * Waiman points out that the weirdness is seeing low events without >>> having a low configured. Eh, this isn't really true with recursive >>> propagation; you may or may not have an elow depending on parental >>> configuration and sibling behavior. >>> >> Do you mind if we just don't update the low event count if low isn't >> set, but leave the rest the same like > What's the motivation for doing anything beyond the skip-on-!usage? It is to avoid making further change. I am fine with modifying the test to allow low event even when low isn't set. >> @@ -659,21 +659,25 @@ static inline bool mem_cgroup_unprotected(struct >> mem_cgro> >>  static inline bool mem_cgroup_below_low(struct mem_cgroup *target, >>                                         struct mem_cgroup *memcg) >>  { >> +       unsigned long elow; >> + >>         if (mem_cgroup_unprotected(target, memcg)) >>                 return false; >> >> -       return READ_ONCE(memcg->memory.elow) >= >> -               page_counter_read(&memcg->memory); >> +       elow = READ_ONCE(memcg->memory.elow); >> +       return elow && (page_counter_read(&memcg->memory) <= elow); >>  } >> >>  static inline bool mem_cgroup_below_min(struct mem_cgroup *target, >>                                         struct mem_cgroup *memcg) >>  { >> +       unsigned long emin; >> + >>         if (mem_cgroup_unprotected(target, memcg)) >>                 return false; >> >> -       return READ_ONCE(memcg->memory.emin) >= >> -               page_counter_read(&memcg->memory); >> +       emin = READ_ONCE(memcg->memory.emin); >> +       return emin && (page_counter_read(&memcg->memory) <= emin); >>  } > This still redefines the empty case to mean excess. That's a quirk I > would have liked to avoid. I don't see why you would need it? OK, I will drop that. > >> @@ -5919,7 +5923,8 @@ static void shrink_node_memcgs(pg_data_t *pgdat, >> struct s> >>                                 sc->memcg_low_skipped = 1; >>                                 continue; >>                         } >> -                       memcg_memory_event(memcg, MEMCG_LOW); >> +                       if (memcg->memory.low) >> +                               memcg_memory_event(memcg, MEMCG_LOW); > That's not right. In setups where protection comes from the parent, no > breaches would ever be counted. OK. Will post a v3 to incorporate your suggestion. Thanks, Longman