linux-mm.kvack.org archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Amir Goldstein <amir73il@gmail.com>
To: Shakeel Butt <shakeelb@google.com>
Cc: Jan Kara <jack@suse.cz>, Yang Shi <yang.s@alibaba-inc.com>,
	Michal Hocko <mhocko@kernel.org>,
	linux-fsdevel <linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org>,
	Linux MM <linux-mm@kvack.org>,
	LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
	linux-api@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] fs: fsnotify: account fsnotify metadata to kmemcg
Date: Tue, 13 Feb 2018 08:30:27 +0200	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <CAOQ4uxjgKUFJ_uhyrQdcTs1FzcN6JrR_JpPc9QBrGJEU+cf65w@mail.gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CAOQ4uxgJqn0CJaf=LMH-iv2g1MJZwPM97K6iCtzrcY3eoN6KjA@mail.gmail.com>

On Thu, Jan 25, 2018 at 10:36 PM, Amir Goldstein <amir73il@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Thu, Jan 25, 2018 at 10:20 PM, Shakeel Butt <shakeelb@google.com> wrote:
>> On Wed, Jan 24, 2018 at 11:51 PM, Amir Goldstein <amir73il@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>
>>> There is a nicer alternative, instead of failing the file access,
>>> an overflow event can be queued. I sent a patch for that and Jan
>>> agreed to the concept, but thought we should let user opt-in for this
>>> change:
>>> https://marc.info/?l=linux-fsdevel&m=150944704716447&w=2
>>>
>>> So IMO, if user opts-in for OVERFLOW instead of ENOMEM,
>>> charging the listener memcg would be non controversial.
>>> Otherwise, I cannot say that starting to charge the listener memgc
>>> for events won't break any application.
>>>
>>

Shakeel, Jan,

Reviving this thread and adding linux-api, because I think it is important to
agree on the API before patches.

The last message on the thread you referenced suggest an API change
for opting in for Q_OVERFLOW on ENOMEM:
https://marc.info/?l=linux-api&m=150946878623441&w=2

However, the suggested API change in in fanotify_mark() syscall and
this is not the time when fsnotify_group is initialized.
I believe for opting-in to accounting events for listener, you
will need to add an opt-in flag for the fanotify_init() syscall.

Something like FAN_GROUP_QUEUE  (better name is welcome)
which is mutually exclusive (?) with FAN_UNLIMITED_QUEUE.

The question is, do we need the user to also explicitly opt-in for
Q_OVERFLOW on ENOMEM with FAN_Q_ERR mark mask?
Should these 2 new APIs be coupled or independent?

Another question is whether FAN_GROUP_QUEUE may require
less than CAP_SYS_ADMIN? Of course for now, this is only a
semantic change, because fanotify_init() requires CAP_SYS_ADMIN
but as the documentation suggests, this may be relaxed in the future.

Thought?

Amir.

--
To unsubscribe, send a message with 'unsubscribe linux-mm' in
the body to majordomo@kvack.org.  For more info on Linux MM,
see: http://www.linux-mm.org/ .
Don't email: <a href=mailto:"dont@kvack.org"> email@kvack.org </a>

  reply	other threads:[~2018-02-13  6:30 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 35+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2017-10-27 18:22 Yang Shi
2017-10-28 14:19 ` Amir Goldstein
2017-10-29  2:39   ` Matthew Wilcox
2017-10-30 12:43 ` Jan Kara
2017-10-30 16:39   ` Yang Shi
2017-10-31 10:12     ` Jan Kara
2017-10-31 16:44       ` Yang Shi
2017-11-01 15:15         ` Jan Kara
2017-11-09 13:54       ` Michal Hocko
2017-11-13 19:10         ` Yang Shi
2017-11-14  9:39           ` Michal Hocko
2017-11-14 17:32             ` Yang Shi
2017-11-15  9:31               ` Jan Kara
2018-01-19 15:02                 ` Shakeel Butt
2018-01-22 20:31                   ` Amir Goldstein
2018-01-24 10:34                     ` Jan Kara
2018-01-24 11:12                       ` Amir Goldstein
2018-01-25  1:08                         ` Shakeel Butt
2018-01-25  1:54                           ` Al Viro
2018-01-25  2:15                             ` Shakeel Butt
2018-01-25  7:51                           ` Amir Goldstein
2018-01-25 20:20                             ` Shakeel Butt
2018-01-25 20:36                               ` Amir Goldstein
2018-02-13  6:30                                 ` Amir Goldstein [this message]
2018-02-13 21:10                                   ` Shakeel Butt
2018-02-13 21:54                                     ` Amir Goldstein
2018-02-13 22:20                                       ` Shakeel Butt
2018-02-14  1:59                                         ` Shakeel Butt
2018-02-14  8:38                                           ` Amir Goldstein
2018-02-19 13:50                                             ` Jan Kara
2018-02-19 19:07                                               ` Amir Goldstein
2018-02-20 12:43                                                 ` Jan Kara
2018-02-20 19:20                                                   ` Shakeel Butt
2018-02-20 20:30                                                   ` Amir Goldstein
2018-02-14  9:00                                         ` Amir Goldstein

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=CAOQ4uxjgKUFJ_uhyrQdcTs1FzcN6JrR_JpPc9QBrGJEU+cf65w@mail.gmail.com \
    --to=amir73il@gmail.com \
    --cc=jack@suse.cz \
    --cc=linux-api@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
    --cc=mhocko@kernel.org \
    --cc=shakeelb@google.com \
    --cc=yang.s@alibaba-inc.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