All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Minchan Kim <minchan@kernel.org>
To: Michal Hocko <mhocko@kernel.org>
Cc: sspatil@google.com, kirill@shutemov.name,
	akpm@linux-foundation.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
	linux-mm@kvack.org, linux-api@vger.kernel.org,
	oleksandr@redhat.com, surenb@google.com, timmurray@google.com,
	dancol@google.com, sonnyrao@google.com, bgeffon@google.com,
	hannes@cmpxchg.org, shakeelb@google.com, joaodias@google.com,
	ktkhai@virtuozzo.com, christian.brauner@ubuntu.com,
	sjpark@amazon.de
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 2/5] mm: introduce external memory hinting API
Date: Wed, 22 Jan 2020 17:41:31 -0800	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20200123014131.GA249784@google.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20200122082853.GS29276@dhcp22.suse.cz>

On Wed, Jan 22, 2020 at 09:28:53AM +0100, Michal Hocko wrote:
> On Tue 21-01-20 10:32:12, Minchan Kim wrote:
> > On Mon, Jan 20, 2020 at 08:58:25AM +0100, Michal Hocko wrote:
> [...]
> > > The interface really has to be robust to future potential usecases.
> > 
> > I do understand your concern but for me, it's chicken and egg problem.
> > We usually do best effort to make something perfect as far as possible
> > but we also don't do over-engineering without real usecase from the
> > beginning.
> > 
> > I already told you how we could synchronize among processes and potential
> > way to be extended Daniel suggested(That's why current API has extra field
> > for the cookie) even though we don't need it right now.
> 
> If you can synchronize with the target task then you do not need a
> remote interface. Just use ptrace and you are done with it.

As I mentioned in other reply, we want to do in caller's context, not
callee's one because target processes stay in little cores, which are
much slower than the core the manager lives in.
The other reason is the apps are already freezed so they couldn't response
by ptrace.

> 
> > If you want to suggest the other way, please explain why your idea is
> > better and why we need it at this moment.
> 
> I believe I have explained my concerns and why they matter. All you are
> saying is that you do not care because your particular usecase doesn't
> care. And that is a first signal of a future disaster when we end up
> with a broken and unfixable interface we have to maintain for ever.

We already had suggested cookie and fd based approaches so I reserved a
argument for that to make the API extendable.
Thing is currently it's a just optimization idea since we have several
ways to sychronize processes(e.g., signal, cgroup freezer, userfaultfd
and so). It's a just matter of granularity, not necessary one we should
introduce it from the beginnig.
If someone needs that kinds of fine-grained consistency, we could extend
it then. And that's the usual way we make progress when we couldn't
know the future.

What do you want to see further?

WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Minchan Kim <minchan-DgEjT+Ai2ygdnm+yROfE0A@public.gmane.org>
To: Michal Hocko <mhocko-DgEjT+Ai2ygdnm+yROfE0A@public.gmane.org>
Cc: sspatil-hpIqsD4AKlfQT0dZR+AlfA@public.gmane.org,
	kirill-oKw7cIdHH8eLwutG50LtGA@public.gmane.org,
	akpm-de/tnXTf+JLsfHDXvbKv3WD2FQJk+8+b@public.gmane.org,
	linux-kernel-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org,
	linux-mm-Bw31MaZKKs3YtjvyW6yDsg@public.gmane.org,
	linux-api-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org,
	oleksandr-H+wXaHxf7aLQT0dZR+AlfA@public.gmane.org,
	surenb-hpIqsD4AKlfQT0dZR+AlfA@public.gmane.org,
	timmurray-hpIqsD4AKlfQT0dZR+AlfA@public.gmane.org,
	dancol-hpIqsD4AKlfQT0dZR+AlfA@public.gmane.org,
	sonnyrao-hpIqsD4AKlfQT0dZR+AlfA@public.gmane.org,
	bgeffon-hpIqsD4AKlfQT0dZR+AlfA@public.gmane.org,
	hannes-druUgvl0LCNAfugRpC6u6w@public.gmane.org,
	shakeelb-hpIqsD4AKlfQT0dZR+AlfA@public.gmane.org,
	joaodias-hpIqsD4AKlfQT0dZR+AlfA@public.gmane.org,
	ktkhai-5HdwGun5lf+gSpxsJD1C4w@public.gmane.org,
	christian.brauner-GeWIH/nMZzLQT0dZR+AlfA@public.gmane.org,
	sjpark-ebkRAfMGSJGzQB+pC5nmwQ@public.gmane.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 2/5] mm: introduce external memory hinting API
Date: Wed, 22 Jan 2020 17:41:31 -0800	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20200123014131.GA249784@google.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20200122082853.GS29276-2MMpYkNvuYDjFM9bn6wA6Q@public.gmane.org>

On Wed, Jan 22, 2020 at 09:28:53AM +0100, Michal Hocko wrote:
> On Tue 21-01-20 10:32:12, Minchan Kim wrote:
> > On Mon, Jan 20, 2020 at 08:58:25AM +0100, Michal Hocko wrote:
> [...]
> > > The interface really has to be robust to future potential usecases.
> > 
> > I do understand your concern but for me, it's chicken and egg problem.
> > We usually do best effort to make something perfect as far as possible
> > but we also don't do over-engineering without real usecase from the
> > beginning.
> > 
> > I already told you how we could synchronize among processes and potential
> > way to be extended Daniel suggested(That's why current API has extra field
> > for the cookie) even though we don't need it right now.
> 
> If you can synchronize with the target task then you do not need a
> remote interface. Just use ptrace and you are done with it.

As I mentioned in other reply, we want to do in caller's context, not
callee's one because target processes stay in little cores, which are
much slower than the core the manager lives in.
The other reason is the apps are already freezed so they couldn't response
by ptrace.

> 
> > If you want to suggest the other way, please explain why your idea is
> > better and why we need it at this moment.
> 
> I believe I have explained my concerns and why they matter. All you are
> saying is that you do not care because your particular usecase doesn't
> care. And that is a first signal of a future disaster when we end up
> with a broken and unfixable interface we have to maintain for ever.

We already had suggested cookie and fd based approaches so I reserved a
argument for that to make the API extendable.
Thing is currently it's a just optimization idea since we have several
ways to sychronize processes(e.g., signal, cgroup freezer, userfaultfd
and so). It's a just matter of granularity, not necessary one we should
introduce it from the beginnig.
If someone needs that kinds of fine-grained consistency, we could extend
it then. And that's the usual way we make progress when we couldn't
know the future.

What do you want to see further?

  parent reply	other threads:[~2020-01-23  1:41 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 65+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2020-01-16 23:59 [PATCH v2 0/5] introduce memory hinting API for external process Minchan Kim
2020-01-16 23:59 ` [PATCH v2 1/5] mm: factor out madvise's core functionality Minchan Kim
2020-01-17 10:02   ` Kirill Tkhai
2020-01-17 10:02     ` Kirill Tkhai
2020-01-17 18:14     ` Minchan Kim
2020-01-17 18:14       ` Minchan Kim
2020-01-16 23:59 ` [PATCH v2 2/5] mm: introduce external memory hinting API Minchan Kim
2020-01-16 23:59   ` Minchan Kim
2020-01-17 11:52   ` Michal Hocko
2020-01-17 11:52     ` Michal Hocko
2020-01-17 15:58     ` Kirill A. Shutemov
2020-01-17 15:58       ` Kirill A. Shutemov
2020-01-17 17:32       ` Minchan Kim
2020-01-17 17:32         ` Minchan Kim
2020-01-17 21:26         ` Kirill A. Shutemov
2020-01-17 21:26           ` Kirill A. Shutemov
2020-01-18  9:40           ` SeongJae Park
2020-01-18  9:40             ` SeongJae Park
2020-01-19 16:14           ` sspatil
2020-01-19 16:14             ` sspatil-hpIqsD4AKlfQT0dZR+AlfA
2020-01-20  7:58             ` Michal Hocko
2020-01-20 10:39               ` Kirill Tkhai
2020-01-20 10:39                 ` Kirill Tkhai
2020-01-21 18:32               ` Minchan Kim
2020-01-22  8:28                 ` Michal Hocko
2020-01-22  8:28                   ` Michal Hocko
2020-01-22  9:36                   ` SeongJae Park
2020-01-22  9:36                     ` SeongJae Park
2020-01-22 10:02                     ` Michal Hocko
2020-01-22 10:02                       ` Michal Hocko
2020-01-22 13:28                       ` SeongJae Park
2020-01-22 13:28                         ` SeongJae Park
2020-01-23  1:41                   ` Minchan Kim [this message]
2020-01-23  1:41                     ` Minchan Kim
2020-01-23  9:13                     ` Michal Hocko
2020-01-21 18:11           ` Minchan Kim
2020-01-21 18:11             ` Minchan Kim
2020-01-22 10:44             ` Oleksandr Natalenko
2020-01-23  1:43               ` Minchan Kim
2020-01-23  7:29                 ` Oleksandr Natalenko
2020-01-17 17:25     ` Minchan Kim
2020-01-17 17:25       ` Minchan Kim
2020-01-20  8:03       ` Michal Hocko
2020-01-20  8:03         ` Michal Hocko
2020-01-20 10:24     ` Kirill Tkhai
2020-01-20 10:24       ` Kirill Tkhai
2020-01-20 11:27       ` Michal Hocko
2020-01-20 11:27         ` Michal Hocko
2020-01-20 12:39         ` Kirill A. Shutemov
2020-01-20 13:24           ` Michal Hocko
2020-01-20 13:24             ` Michal Hocko
2020-01-20 14:21             ` Kirill A. Shutemov
2020-01-20 15:44               ` Michal Hocko
2020-01-20 15:44                 ` Michal Hocko
2020-01-21 18:43             ` Minchan Kim
2020-01-21 18:43               ` Minchan Kim
2020-01-16 23:59 ` [PATCH v2 3/5] mm/madvise: employ mmget_still_valid for write lock Minchan Kim
2020-01-16 23:59 ` [PATCH v2 4/5] mm/madvise: allow KSM hints for remote API Minchan Kim
2020-01-17 10:13   ` Kirill Tkhai
2020-01-17 10:13     ` Kirill Tkhai
2020-01-17 12:34     ` Oleksandr Natalenko
2020-01-17 12:34       ` Oleksandr Natalenko
2020-01-21 17:45       ` Minchan Kim
2020-01-21 17:45         ` Minchan Kim
2020-01-16 23:59 ` [PATCH v2 5/5] mm: support both pid and pidfd for process_madvise Minchan Kim

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=20200123014131.GA249784@google.com \
    --to=minchan@kernel.org \
    --cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
    --cc=bgeffon@google.com \
    --cc=christian.brauner@ubuntu.com \
    --cc=dancol@google.com \
    --cc=hannes@cmpxchg.org \
    --cc=joaodias@google.com \
    --cc=kirill@shutemov.name \
    --cc=ktkhai@virtuozzo.com \
    --cc=linux-api@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
    --cc=mhocko@kernel.org \
    --cc=oleksandr@redhat.com \
    --cc=shakeelb@google.com \
    --cc=sjpark@amazon.de \
    --cc=sonnyrao@google.com \
    --cc=sspatil@google.com \
    --cc=surenb@google.com \
    --cc=timmurray@google.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 an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.