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 B5827C433F5 for ; Tue, 11 Oct 2022 19:01:25 +0000 (UTC) Received: by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix) id 081426B0071; Tue, 11 Oct 2022 15:01:25 -0400 (EDT) Received: by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix, from userid 40) id 032276B0073; Tue, 11 Oct 2022 15:01:24 -0400 (EDT) X-Delivered-To: int-list-linux-mm@kvack.org Received: by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix, from userid 63042) id E3C126B0074; Tue, 11 Oct 2022 15:01:24 -0400 (EDT) X-Delivered-To: linux-mm@kvack.org Received: from relay.hostedemail.com (smtprelay0014.hostedemail.com [216.40.44.14]) by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id D104C6B0071 for ; Tue, 11 Oct 2022 15:01:24 -0400 (EDT) Received: from smtpin20.hostedemail.com (a10.router.float.18 [10.200.18.1]) by unirelay04.hostedemail.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 96E0D1A07DD for ; Tue, 11 Oct 2022 19:01:24 +0000 (UTC) X-FDA: 80009586888.20.B0AFA2D Received: from smtp-out2.suse.de (smtp-out2.suse.de [195.135.220.29]) by imf02.hostedemail.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0B62280027 for ; Tue, 11 Oct 2022 19:01:22 +0000 (UTC) Received: from imap2.suse-dmz.suse.de (imap2.suse-dmz.suse.de [192.168.254.74]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature ECDSA (P-521) server-digest SHA512) (No client certificate requested) by smtp-out2.suse.de (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 828581F37C; Tue, 11 Oct 2022 19:01:21 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=suse.com; s=susede1; t=1665514881; h=from:from:reply-to:date:date:message-id:message-id:to:to:cc:cc: mime-version:mime-version:content-type:content-type: in-reply-to:in-reply-to:references:references; bh=w1Wip/kR/nLx7NLOcIVQ++U0LbZfFaHpu0ZiHUekL6M=; b=r0pi3DBSDiAet5rHRn6FCp5z5UxtoxqnvqLG4J56c9yiBSUM+770wvzqJwNB5kNiRUa1IZ shbQchCLgt2qSnnrrkvPeyFYQoKrHIwkovCmtVRT2LFUY6Zyvf0AC2axO2N9Sf/+3Dimv2 LBdTVAi9D5F06aQWnvV/8tU8HTcuo6M= Received: from imap2.suse-dmz.suse.de (imap2.suse-dmz.suse.de [192.168.254.74]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature ECDSA (P-521) server-digest SHA512) (No client certificate requested) by imap2.suse-dmz.suse.de (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 5220E139ED; Tue, 11 Oct 2022 19:01:21 +0000 (UTC) Received: from dovecot-director2.suse.de ([192.168.254.65]) by imap2.suse-dmz.suse.de with ESMTPSA id 9NrHEYG9RWN2PwAAMHmgww (envelope-from ); Tue, 11 Oct 2022 19:01:21 +0000 Date: Tue, 11 Oct 2022 21:01:20 +0200 From: Michal Hocko To: Tejun Heo Cc: Waiman Long , Johannes Weiner , Roman Gushchin , Shakeel Butt , Muchun Song , Andrew Morton , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, cgroups@vger.kernel.org, linux-mm@kvack.org, Chris Down Subject: Re: [PATCH] mm/memcontrol: Don't increase effective low/min if no protection needed Message-ID: References: <20221011143015.1152968-1-longman@redhat.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: ARC-Authentication-Results: i=1; imf02.hostedemail.com; dkim=pass header.d=suse.com header.s=susede1 header.b=r0pi3DBS; spf=pass (imf02.hostedemail.com: domain of mhocko@suse.com designates 195.135.220.29 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=mhocko@suse.com; dmarc=pass (policy=quarantine) header.from=suse.com ARC-Seal: i=1; s=arc-20220608; d=hostedemail.com; t=1665514883; a=rsa-sha256; cv=none; b=QI0N6esJfpVkoKZWbUiQo/o1miEl5OvAb4IGlothRUybG8VXpkzdKeFR7M1PjgjlBLryI2 /rFkfPUpIDesPDynSXdZOpDkZoFZKeXJM8zoUeDmvhEWN7Gb8kIDP/pmrvnVgAn9931O0+ ODqYWgSQc71GwiwE4Bvsn2ITxNG3IP4= ARC-Message-Signature: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=hostedemail.com; s=arc-20220608; t=1665514883; 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: in-reply-to:in-reply-to:references:references:dkim-signature; bh=w1Wip/kR/nLx7NLOcIVQ++U0LbZfFaHpu0ZiHUekL6M=; b=U9SW57nQZQzRyd/bUT5uroCdOAp3+mLjqU9BQvcQLovlLtJXC1eWOGj/9XjoLJq0PijRxo lztv+I+iU3cQEh7mrGcMusk77KU/CDr7s2Lvs9uYkT1Woy0bAPscZji86DKGg/iHBP6Blh S3wK5768ITI0LPIyUHCjKv5WBbQf1JY= X-Rspamd-Queue-Id: 0B62280027 X-Rspam-User: Authentication-Results: imf02.hostedemail.com; dkim=pass header.d=suse.com header.s=susede1 header.b=r0pi3DBS; spf=pass (imf02.hostedemail.com: domain of mhocko@suse.com designates 195.135.220.29 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=mhocko@suse.com; dmarc=pass (policy=quarantine) header.from=suse.com X-Rspamd-Server: rspam04 X-Stat-Signature: zo4dty3g8qu8u1og8db659fneipwb8gf X-HE-Tag: 1665514882-944365 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: On Tue 11-10-22 07:04:32, Tejun Heo wrote: > On Tue, Oct 11, 2022 at 01:00:22PM -0400, Waiman Long wrote: > > You are right about that. An alternative way to address this issue is to > > disable memory low event when memory.low isn't set. An user who want to > > track memory.low event has to set it to a non-zero value. Would that be > > acceptable? > > Wouldn't it make sense to fix the test? With recursive_prot on, the cgroup > actually is under low protection and it seems like the correct behavior is > to report the low events accordingly. Agreed, the semantic makes sense and it seems to be just the test that is not aware of it. -- Michal Hocko SUSE Labs