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 mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 30CFAC433FE for ; Tue, 12 Oct 2021 15:36:17 +0000 (UTC) Received: from kanga.kvack.org (kanga.kvack.org [205.233.56.17]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id D31FF61076 for ; Tue, 12 Oct 2021 15:36:16 +0000 (UTC) DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.4.1 mail.kernel.org D31FF61076 Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dmarc=fail (p=quarantine dis=none) header.from=suse.com Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=kvack.org Received: by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix) id 43C26900002; Tue, 12 Oct 2021 11:36:16 -0400 (EDT) Received: by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix, from userid 40) id 3EB526B0072; Tue, 12 Oct 2021 11:36:16 -0400 (EDT) X-Delivered-To: int-list-linux-mm@kvack.org Received: by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix, from userid 63042) id 2B2A1900002; Tue, 12 Oct 2021 11:36:16 -0400 (EDT) X-Delivered-To: linux-mm@kvack.org Received: from forelay.hostedemail.com (smtprelay0082.hostedemail.com [216.40.44.82]) by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 178D66B0071 for ; Tue, 12 Oct 2021 11:36:16 -0400 (EDT) Received: from smtpin23.hostedemail.com (10.5.19.251.rfc1918.com [10.5.19.251]) by forelay02.hostedemail.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id AA108250C6 for ; Tue, 12 Oct 2021 15:36:15 +0000 (UTC) X-FDA: 78688186710.23.171BD4B Received: from smtp-out1.suse.de (smtp-out1.suse.de [195.135.220.28]) by imf19.hostedemail.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 27CACB0000B6 for ; Tue, 12 Oct 2021 15:36:15 +0000 (UTC) Received: from relay2.suse.de (relay2.suse.de [149.44.160.134]) by smtp-out1.suse.de (Postfix) with ESMTP id D4EC8221AB; Tue, 12 Oct 2021 15:36:13 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=suse.com; s=susede1; t=1634052973; 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=Z4t443UJiJ2rcoEB8L8cMpLE3EGEoriZGHhNtpCV59o=; b=LCAWful78QuPBIVafj5uLFJo72ALVVdM8BR8Gp5+khkEphWBJoq8TBmZSTM0EVae88QNRP As50/6u8kW+DCDHqOrREg4u2ReEWtBd2xfSfWu8Qfx6P9Df+h+++WUYuIDlZWa3YSQSWP3 uhiTrgTiXOhkCCm/pagqt/x87mWJrik= Received: from suse.cz (unknown [10.100.201.86]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by relay2.suse.de (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 98B00A3B81; Tue, 12 Oct 2021 15:36:13 +0000 (UTC) Date: Tue, 12 Oct 2021 17:36:10 +0200 From: Michal Hocko To: Vasily Averin Cc: Johannes Weiner , Vladimir Davydov , Andrew Morton , Shakeel Butt , Mel Gorman , Roman Gushchin , Uladzislau Rezki , Vlastimil Babka , cgroups@vger.kernel.org, linux-mm@kvack.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, kernel@openvz.org Subject: Re: [PATCH mm v3] memcg: enable memory accounting in __alloc_pages_bulk Message-ID: References: <0baa2b26-a41b-acab-b75d-72ec241f5151@virtuozzo.com> <60df0efd-f458-a13c-7c89-749bdab21d1d@virtuozzo.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <60df0efd-f458-a13c-7c89-749bdab21d1d@virtuozzo.com> X-Rspamd-Server: rspam03 X-Rspamd-Queue-Id: 27CACB0000B6 X-Stat-Signature: bujrda437ptpobkqsfwcp4ix9fzz55gm Authentication-Results: imf19.hostedemail.com; dkim=pass header.d=suse.com header.s=susede1 header.b=LCAWful7; dmarc=pass (policy=quarantine) header.from=suse.com; spf=pass (imf19.hostedemail.com: domain of mhocko@suse.com designates 195.135.220.28 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=mhocko@suse.com X-HE-Tag: 1634052975-444137 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 12-10-21 17:58:21, Vasily Averin wrote: > Enable memory accounting for bulk page allocator. ENOCHANGELOG And I have to say I am not very happy about the solution. It adds a very tricky code where it splits different charging steps apart. Would it be just too inefficient to charge page-by-page once all pages are already taken away from the pcp lists? This bulk should be small so this shouldn't really cause massive problems. I mean something like diff --git a/mm/page_alloc.c b/mm/page_alloc.c index b37435c274cf..8bcd69195ef5 100644 --- a/mm/page_alloc.c +++ b/mm/page_alloc.c @@ -5308,6 +5308,10 @@ unsigned long __alloc_pages_bulk(gfp_t gfp, int preferred_nid, local_unlock_irqrestore(&pagesets.lock, flags); + if (memcg_kmem_enabled() && (gfp & __GFP_ACCOUNT)) { + /* charge pages here */ + } + __count_zid_vm_events(PGALLOC, zone_idx(zone), nr_account); zone_statistics(ac.preferred_zoneref->zone, zone, nr_account); -- Michal Hocko SUSE Labs