From: Yosry Ahmed <yosryahmed@google.com>
To: Nhat Pham <nphamcs@gmail.com>
Cc: akpm@linux-foundation.org, hannes@cmpxchg.org,
cerasuolodomenico@gmail.com, sjenning@redhat.com,
ddstreet@ieee.org, vitaly.wool@konsulko.com, mhocko@kernel.org,
roman.gushchin@linux.dev, shakeelb@google.com,
muchun.song@linux.dev, linux-mm@kvack.org, kernel-team@meta.com,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, cgroups@vger.kernel.org,
linux-doc@vger.kernel.org, linux-kselftest@vger.kernel.org,
shuah@kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 2/5] zswap: make shrinking memcg-aware
Date: Wed, 18 Oct 2023 16:20:19 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <CAJD7tka2aVKBJj6cYutcVzOGzj_6gop6-ytSmWWML=sEe9qHbA@mail.gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20231017232152.2605440-3-nphamcs@gmail.com>
On Tue, Oct 17, 2023 at 4:21 PM Nhat Pham <nphamcs@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> From: Domenico Cerasuolo <cerasuolodomenico@gmail.com>
>
> Currently, we only have a single global LRU for zswap. This makes it
> impossible to perform worload-specific shrinking - an memcg cannot
> determine which pages in the pool it owns, and often ends up writing
> pages from other memcgs. This issue has been previously observed in
> practice and mitigated by simply disabling memcg-initiated shrinking:
>
> https://lore.kernel.org/all/20230530232435.3097106-1-nphamcs@gmail.com/T/#u
>
> This patch fully resolves the issue by replacing the global zswap LRU
> with memcg- and NUMA-specific LRUs, and modify the reclaim logic:
>
> a) When a store attempt hits an memcg limit, it now triggers a
> synchronous reclaim attempt that, if successful, allows the new
> hotter page to be accepted by zswap.
> b) If the store attempt instead hits the global zswap limit, it will
> trigger an asynchronous reclaim attempt, in which an memcg is
> selected for reclaim in a round-robin-like fashion.
Could you explain the rationale behind the difference in behavior here
between the global limit and the memcg limit?
>
> Signed-off-by: Domenico Cerasuolo <cerasuolodomenico@gmail.com>
> Co-developed-by: Nhat Pham <nphamcs@gmail.com>
> Signed-off-by: Nhat Pham <nphamcs@gmail.com>
> ---
> include/linux/memcontrol.h | 5 ++
> mm/swap.h | 3 +-
> mm/swap_state.c | 17 +++-
> mm/zswap.c | 179 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++-----------
> 4 files changed, 147 insertions(+), 57 deletions(-)
This is a dense patch, I haven't absorbed all of it yet, but the first
round of comments below.
>
> diff --git a/include/linux/memcontrol.h b/include/linux/memcontrol.h
> index 031102ac9311..3de10fabea0f 100644
> --- a/include/linux/memcontrol.h
> +++ b/include/linux/memcontrol.h
> @@ -1179,6 +1179,11 @@ static inline struct mem_cgroup *page_memcg_check(struct page *page)
> return NULL;
> }
>
> +static inline struct mem_cgroup *get_mem_cgroup_from_objcg(struct obj_cgroup *objcg)
> +{
> + return NULL;
> +}
> +
> static inline bool folio_memcg_kmem(struct folio *folio)
> {
> return false;
> diff --git a/mm/swap.h b/mm/swap.h
> index 8a3c7a0ace4f..bbd6ce661a20 100644
> --- a/mm/swap.h
> +++ b/mm/swap.h
> @@ -50,7 +50,8 @@ struct page *read_swap_cache_async(swp_entry_t entry, gfp_t gfp_mask,
> struct page *__read_swap_cache_async(swp_entry_t entry, gfp_t gfp_mask,
> struct vm_area_struct *vma,
> unsigned long addr,
> - bool *new_page_allocated);
> + bool *new_page_allocated,
> + bool fail_if_exists);
> struct page *swap_cluster_readahead(swp_entry_t entry, gfp_t flag,
> struct vm_fault *vmf);
> struct page *swapin_readahead(swp_entry_t entry, gfp_t flag,
> diff --git a/mm/swap_state.c b/mm/swap_state.c
> index b3b14bd0dd64..0356df52b06a 100644
> --- a/mm/swap_state.c
> +++ b/mm/swap_state.c
> @@ -411,7 +411,7 @@ struct folio *filemap_get_incore_folio(struct address_space *mapping,
>
> struct page *__read_swap_cache_async(swp_entry_t entry, gfp_t gfp_mask,
> struct vm_area_struct *vma, unsigned long addr,
> - bool *new_page_allocated)
> + bool *new_page_allocated, bool fail_if_exists)
nit: I don't feel like "fail" is the correct word here. Perhaps "skip"?
> {
> struct swap_info_struct *si;
> struct folio *folio;
> @@ -468,6 +468,15 @@ struct page *__read_swap_cache_async(swp_entry_t entry, gfp_t gfp_mask,
> if (err != -EEXIST)
> goto fail_put_swap;
>
> + /*
> + * This check guards against a state that happens if a call
> + * to __read_swap_cache_async triggers a reclaim, if the
> + * reclaimer (zswap's writeback as of now) then decides to
> + * reclaim that same entry, then the subsequent call to
> + * __read_swap_cache_async would get stuck in this loop.
I think this comment needs to first state that it is protecting
against a recursive call in general, not necessarily in reclaim, as
__read_swap_cache_async() is not usually called in the context of
reclaim so this can be confusing. Then it can give the exact example
we have today. Perhaps something like:
Protect against a recursive call to __read_swap_cache_async() on the
same entry waiting forever here because SWAP_HAS_CACHE is set but the
folio is not the swap cache yet. This can happen today if
mem_cgroup_swapin_charge_folio() below triggers reclaim through zswap,
which may call __read_swap_cache_async() in the writeback path.
> + */
> + if (fail_if_exists && err == -EEXIST)
We already made sure in the preceding condition that err is -EEXIST.
> + goto fail_put_swap;
> /*
> * We might race against __delete_from_swap_cache(), and
> * stumble across a swap_map entry whose SWAP_HAS_CACHE
> @@ -530,7 +539,7 @@ struct page *read_swap_cache_async(swp_entry_t entry, gfp_t gfp_mask,
> {
> bool page_was_allocated;
> struct page *retpage = __read_swap_cache_async(entry, gfp_mask,
> - vma, addr, &page_was_allocated);
> + vma, addr, &page_was_allocated, false);
>
> if (page_was_allocated)
> swap_readpage(retpage, false, plug);
> @@ -649,7 +658,7 @@ struct page *swap_cluster_readahead(swp_entry_t entry, gfp_t gfp_mask,
> /* Ok, do the async read-ahead now */
> page = __read_swap_cache_async(
> swp_entry(swp_type(entry), offset),
> - gfp_mask, vma, addr, &page_allocated);
> + gfp_mask, vma, addr, &page_allocated, false);
> if (!page)
> continue;
> if (page_allocated) {
> @@ -815,7 +824,7 @@ static struct page *swap_vma_readahead(swp_entry_t fentry, gfp_t gfp_mask,
> pte_unmap(pte);
> pte = NULL;
> page = __read_swap_cache_async(entry, gfp_mask, vma,
> - addr, &page_allocated);
> + addr, &page_allocated, false);
> if (!page)
> continue;
> if (page_allocated) {
> diff --git a/mm/zswap.c b/mm/zswap.c
> index 083c693602b8..d2989ad11814 100644
> --- a/mm/zswap.c
> +++ b/mm/zswap.c
> @@ -34,6 +34,7 @@
> #include <linux/writeback.h>
> #include <linux/pagemap.h>
> #include <linux/workqueue.h>
> +#include <linux/list_lru.h>
>
> #include "swap.h"
> #include "internal.h"
> @@ -171,8 +172,8 @@ struct zswap_pool {
> struct work_struct shrink_work;
> struct hlist_node node;
> char tfm_name[CRYPTO_MAX_ALG_NAME];
> - struct list_head lru;
> - spinlock_t lru_lock;
> + struct list_lru list_lru;
> + struct mem_cgroup *next_shrink;
> };
>
> /*
> @@ -288,15 +289,25 @@ static void zswap_update_total_size(void)
> zswap_pool_total_size = total;
> }
>
> +static inline struct mem_cgroup *get_mem_cgroup_from_entry(struct zswap_entry *entry)
> +{
> + return entry->objcg ? get_mem_cgroup_from_objcg(entry->objcg) : NULL;
> +}
> +
> +static inline int entry_to_nid(struct zswap_entry *entry)
> +{
> + return page_to_nid(virt_to_page(entry));
> +}
> +
> /*********************************
> * zswap entry functions
> **********************************/
> static struct kmem_cache *zswap_entry_cache;
>
> -static struct zswap_entry *zswap_entry_cache_alloc(gfp_t gfp)
> +static struct zswap_entry *zswap_entry_cache_alloc(gfp_t gfp, int nid)
> {
> struct zswap_entry *entry;
> - entry = kmem_cache_alloc(zswap_entry_cache, gfp);
> + entry = kmem_cache_alloc_node(zswap_entry_cache, gfp, nid);
> if (!entry)
> return NULL;
> entry->refcount = 1;
> @@ -309,6 +320,27 @@ static void zswap_entry_cache_free(struct zswap_entry *entry)
> kmem_cache_free(zswap_entry_cache, entry);
> }
>
> +/*********************************
> +* lru functions
> +**********************************/
> +static bool zswap_lru_add(struct list_lru *list_lru, struct zswap_entry *entry)
> +{
> + struct mem_cgroup *memcg = get_mem_cgroup_from_entry(entry);
Could we avoid the need for get/put with an rcu_read_lock() instead?
> + bool added = __list_lru_add(list_lru, &entry->lru, entry_to_nid(entry), memcg);
> +
> + mem_cgroup_put(memcg);
> + return added;
> +}
> +
> +static bool zswap_lru_del(struct list_lru *list_lru, struct zswap_entry *entry)
> +{
> + struct mem_cgroup *memcg = get_mem_cgroup_from_entry(entry);
> + bool removed = __list_lru_del(list_lru, &entry->lru, entry_to_nid(entry), memcg);
> +
> + mem_cgroup_put(memcg);
> + return removed;
> +}
> +
> /*********************************
> * rbtree functions
> **********************************/
> @@ -393,9 +425,7 @@ static void zswap_free_entry(struct zswap_entry *entry)
> if (!entry->length)
> atomic_dec(&zswap_same_filled_pages);
> else {
> - spin_lock(&entry->pool->lru_lock);
> - list_del(&entry->lru);
> - spin_unlock(&entry->pool->lru_lock);
> + zswap_lru_del(&entry->pool->list_lru, entry);
> zpool_free(zswap_find_zpool(entry), entry->handle);
> zswap_pool_put(entry->pool);
> }
> @@ -629,21 +659,16 @@ static void zswap_invalidate_entry(struct zswap_tree *tree,
> zswap_entry_put(tree, entry);
> }
>
> -static int zswap_reclaim_entry(struct zswap_pool *pool)
> +static enum lru_status shrink_memcg_cb(struct list_head *item, struct list_lru_one *l,
> + spinlock_t *lock, void *arg)
> {
> - struct zswap_entry *entry;
> + struct zswap_entry *entry = container_of(item, struct zswap_entry, lru);
> + struct mem_cgroup *memcg;
> struct zswap_tree *tree;
> pgoff_t swpoffset;
> - int ret;
> + enum lru_status ret = LRU_REMOVED_RETRY;
> + int writeback_result;
>
> - /* Get an entry off the LRU */
> - spin_lock(&pool->lru_lock);
> - if (list_empty(&pool->lru)) {
> - spin_unlock(&pool->lru_lock);
> - return -EINVAL;
> - }
> - entry = list_last_entry(&pool->lru, struct zswap_entry, lru);
> - list_del_init(&entry->lru);
> /*
> * Once the lru lock is dropped, the entry might get freed. The
> * swpoffset is copied to the stack, and entry isn't deref'd again
> @@ -651,28 +676,33 @@ static int zswap_reclaim_entry(struct zswap_pool *pool)
> */
> swpoffset = swp_offset(entry->swpentry);
> tree = zswap_trees[swp_type(entry->swpentry)];
> - spin_unlock(&pool->lru_lock);
> + list_lru_isolate(l, item);
> + spin_unlock(lock);
Perhaps a comment somewhere stating that we only return either
LRU_REMOVED_RETRY or LRU_RETRY, so it's fine to drop and reacquire the
lock.
>
> /* Check for invalidate() race */
> spin_lock(&tree->lock);
> if (entry != zswap_rb_search(&tree->rbroot, swpoffset)) {
> - ret = -EAGAIN;
> goto unlock;
> }
nit: braces no longer needed?
> /* Hold a reference to prevent a free during writeback */
> zswap_entry_get(entry);
> spin_unlock(&tree->lock);
>
> - ret = zswap_writeback_entry(entry, tree);
> + writeback_result = zswap_writeback_entry(entry, tree);
>
> spin_lock(&tree->lock);
> - if (ret) {
> - /* Writeback failed, put entry back on LRU */
> - spin_lock(&pool->lru_lock);
> - list_move(&entry->lru, &pool->lru);
> - spin_unlock(&pool->lru_lock);
> + if (writeback_result) {
> + zswap_reject_reclaim_fail++;
> + memcg = get_mem_cgroup_from_entry(entry);
> + spin_lock(lock);
> + /* we cannot use zswap_lru_add here, because it increments node's lru count */
> + list_lru_putback(&entry->pool->list_lru, item, entry_to_nid(entry), memcg);
> + spin_unlock(lock);
> + mem_cgroup_put(memcg);
> + ret = LRU_RETRY;
> goto put_unlock;
> }
> + zswap_written_back_pages++;
Why is this moved here from zswap_writeback_entry()? Also why is
zswap_reject_reclaim_fail incremented here instead of inside
zswap_writeback_entry()?
>
> /*
> * Writeback started successfully, the page now belongs to the
> @@ -686,7 +716,36 @@ static int zswap_reclaim_entry(struct zswap_pool *pool)
> zswap_entry_put(tree, entry);
> unlock:
> spin_unlock(&tree->lock);
> - return ret ? -EAGAIN : 0;
> + spin_lock(lock);
> + return ret;
> +}
> +
> +static int shrink_memcg(struct mem_cgroup *memcg)
> +{
> + struct zswap_pool *pool;
> + int nid, shrunk = 0;
> +
> + pool = zswap_pool_current_get();
> + if (!pool)
> + return -EINVAL;
> +
> + /*
> + * Skip zombies because their LRUs are reparented and we would be
> + * reclaiming from the parent instead of the dead memcgroup.
nit: s/memcgroup/memcg.
> + */
> + if (memcg && !mem_cgroup_online(memcg))
> + goto out;
If we move this above zswap_pool_current_get(), we can return directly
and remove the label. I noticed we will return -EAGAIN if memcg is
offline. IIUC -EAGAIN for the caller will move on to the next memcg,
but I am wondering if a different errno would be clearer here.
> +
> + for_each_node_state(nid, N_NORMAL_MEMORY) {
> + unsigned long nr_to_walk = 1;
> +
> + if (list_lru_walk_one(&pool->list_lru, nid, memcg, &shrink_memcg_cb,
> + NULL, &nr_to_walk))
> + shrunk++;
nit:
shrunk += list_lru_walk_one(..);
> + }
> +out:
> + zswap_pool_put(pool);
> + return shrunk ? 0 : -EAGAIN;
> }
>
> static void shrink_worker(struct work_struct *w)
> @@ -695,10 +754,13 @@ static void shrink_worker(struct work_struct *w)
> shrink_work);
> int ret, failures = 0;
>
> + /* global reclaim will select cgroup in a round-robin fashion. */
> do {
> - ret = zswap_reclaim_entry(pool);
> + pool->next_shrink = mem_cgroup_iter(NULL, pool->next_shrink, NULL);
Perhaps next_shrink_memcg is a better name here?
> +
> + ret = shrink_memcg(pool->next_shrink);
> +
> if (ret) {
> - zswap_reject_reclaim_fail++;
> if (ret != -EAGAIN)
> break;
> if (++failures == MAX_RECLAIM_RETRIES)
> @@ -764,8 +826,7 @@ static struct zswap_pool *zswap_pool_create(char *type, char *compressor)
> */
> kref_init(&pool->kref);
> INIT_LIST_HEAD(&pool->list);
> - INIT_LIST_HEAD(&pool->lru);
> - spin_lock_init(&pool->lru_lock);
> + list_lru_init_memcg(&pool->list_lru, NULL);
> INIT_WORK(&pool->shrink_work, shrink_worker);
>
> zswap_pool_debug("created", pool);
> @@ -831,6 +892,9 @@ static void zswap_pool_destroy(struct zswap_pool *pool)
>
> cpuhp_state_remove_instance(CPUHP_MM_ZSWP_POOL_PREPARE, &pool->node);
> free_percpu(pool->acomp_ctx);
> + list_lru_destroy(&pool->list_lru);
> + if (pool->next_shrink)
> + mem_cgroup_put(pool->next_shrink);
> for (i = 0; i < ZSWAP_NR_ZPOOLS; i++)
> zpool_destroy_pool(pool->zpools[i]);
> kfree(pool);
> @@ -1076,7 +1140,7 @@ static int zswap_writeback_entry(struct zswap_entry *entry,
>
> /* try to allocate swap cache page */
> page = __read_swap_cache_async(swpentry, GFP_KERNEL, NULL, 0,
> - &page_was_allocated);
> + &page_was_allocated, true);
> if (!page) {
> ret = -ENOMEM;
> goto fail;
> @@ -1142,7 +1206,6 @@ static int zswap_writeback_entry(struct zswap_entry *entry,
> /* start writeback */
> __swap_writepage(page, &wbc);
> put_page(page);
> - zswap_written_back_pages++;
>
> return ret;
>
> @@ -1199,8 +1262,10 @@ bool zswap_store(struct folio *folio)
> struct scatterlist input, output;
> struct crypto_acomp_ctx *acomp_ctx;
> struct obj_cgroup *objcg = NULL;
> + struct mem_cgroup *memcg = NULL;
> struct zswap_pool *pool;
> struct zpool *zpool;
> + int lru_alloc_ret;
> unsigned int dlen = PAGE_SIZE;
> unsigned long handle, value;
> char *buf;
> @@ -1230,15 +1295,15 @@ bool zswap_store(struct folio *folio)
> zswap_invalidate_entry(tree, dupentry);
> }
> spin_unlock(&tree->lock);
> -
> - /*
> - * XXX: zswap reclaim does not work with cgroups yet. Without a
> - * cgroup-aware entry LRU, we will push out entries system-wide based on
> - * local cgroup limits.
> - */
> objcg = get_obj_cgroup_from_folio(folio);
> - if (objcg && !obj_cgroup_may_zswap(objcg))
> - goto reject;
> + if (objcg && !obj_cgroup_may_zswap(objcg)) {
> + memcg = get_mem_cgroup_from_objcg(objcg);
> + if (shrink_memcg(memcg)) {
> + mem_cgroup_put(memcg);
> + goto reject;
> + }
> + mem_cgroup_put(memcg);
> + }
>
> /* reclaim space if needed */
> if (zswap_is_full()) {
> @@ -1254,10 +1319,15 @@ bool zswap_store(struct folio *folio)
> zswap_pool_reached_full = false;
> }
>
> + pool = zswap_pool_current_get();
> + if (!pool)
> + goto reject;
> +
Why do we need to move zswap_pool_current_get() up here?
> /* allocate entry */
> - entry = zswap_entry_cache_alloc(GFP_KERNEL);
> + entry = zswap_entry_cache_alloc(GFP_KERNEL, page_to_nid(page));
> if (!entry) {
> zswap_reject_kmemcache_fail++;
> + zswap_pool_put(pool);
> goto reject;
> }
>
> @@ -1269,6 +1339,7 @@ bool zswap_store(struct folio *folio)
> entry->length = 0;
> entry->value = value;
> atomic_inc(&zswap_same_filled_pages);
> + zswap_pool_put(pool);
> goto insert_entry;
> }
> kunmap_atomic(src);
> @@ -1278,9 +1349,15 @@ bool zswap_store(struct folio *folio)
> goto freepage;
>
> /* if entry is successfully added, it keeps the reference */
> - entry->pool = zswap_pool_current_get();
> - if (!entry->pool)
> - goto freepage;
> + entry->pool = pool;
> + if (objcg) {
> + memcg = get_mem_cgroup_from_objcg(objcg);
> + lru_alloc_ret = memcg_list_lru_alloc(memcg, &pool->list_lru, GFP_KERNEL);
> + mem_cgroup_put(memcg);
> +
> + if (lru_alloc_ret)
> + goto freepage;
> + }
>
> /* compress */
> acomp_ctx = raw_cpu_ptr(entry->pool->acomp_ctx);
> @@ -1358,9 +1435,8 @@ bool zswap_store(struct folio *folio)
> zswap_invalidate_entry(tree, dupentry);
> }
> if (entry->length) {
> - spin_lock(&entry->pool->lru_lock);
> - list_add(&entry->lru, &entry->pool->lru);
> - spin_unlock(&entry->pool->lru_lock);
> + INIT_LIST_HEAD(&entry->lru);
> + zswap_lru_add(&pool->list_lru, entry);
> }
> spin_unlock(&tree->lock);
>
> @@ -1373,8 +1449,8 @@ bool zswap_store(struct folio *folio)
>
> put_dstmem:
> mutex_unlock(acomp_ctx->mutex);
> - zswap_pool_put(entry->pool);
> freepage:
> + zswap_pool_put(entry->pool);
> zswap_entry_cache_free(entry);
> reject:
> if (objcg)
> @@ -1467,9 +1543,8 @@ bool zswap_load(struct folio *folio)
> zswap_invalidate_entry(tree, entry);
> folio_mark_dirty(folio);
> } else if (entry->length) {
> - spin_lock(&entry->pool->lru_lock);
> - list_move(&entry->lru, &entry->pool->lru);
> - spin_unlock(&entry->pool->lru_lock);
> + zswap_lru_del(&entry->pool->list_lru, entry);
> + zswap_lru_add(&entry->pool->list_lru, entry);
> }
> zswap_entry_put(tree, entry);
> spin_unlock(&tree->lock);
> --
> 2.34.1
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2023-10-18 23:21 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 31+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2023-10-17 23:21 [PATCH v3 0/5] workload-specific and memory pressure-driven zswap writeback Nhat Pham
2023-10-17 23:21 ` [PATCH v3 1/5] mm: list_lru: allow external numa node and cgroup tracking Nhat Pham
2023-10-18 22:26 ` Yosry Ahmed
2023-10-18 23:09 ` Nhat Pham
2023-10-17 23:21 ` [PATCH v3 2/5] zswap: make shrinking memcg-aware Nhat Pham
2023-10-18 23:20 ` Yosry Ahmed [this message]
2023-10-18 23:46 ` Nhat Pham
2023-10-18 23:48 ` Nhat Pham
2023-10-19 1:11 ` Yosry Ahmed
2023-10-19 12:47 ` Domenico Cerasuolo
2023-10-19 16:28 ` Yosry Ahmed
2023-10-19 12:29 ` Domenico Cerasuolo
2023-10-19 16:14 ` Yosry Ahmed
2023-10-20 19:58 ` Nhat Pham
2023-10-17 23:21 ` [PATCH v3 3/5] mm: memcg: add per-memcg zswap writeback stat Nhat Pham
2023-10-17 23:35 ` Nhat Pham
2023-10-17 23:37 ` Jeff Johnson
2023-10-17 23:40 ` Nhat Pham
2023-10-18 23:24 ` Yosry Ahmed
2023-10-18 23:50 ` Nhat Pham
2023-10-17 23:21 ` [PATCH v3 4/5] selftests: cgroup: update per-memcg zswap writeback selftest Nhat Pham
2023-10-17 23:34 ` Nhat Pham
2023-10-17 23:44 ` Nhat Pham
2023-10-17 23:21 ` [PATCH v3 5/5] zswap: shrinks zswap pool based on memory pressure Nhat Pham
2023-10-18 23:36 ` Yosry Ahmed
2023-10-20 19:14 ` Nhat Pham
2023-10-19 17:12 ` [PATCH v3 0/5] workload-specific and memory pressure-driven zswap writeback Andrew Morton
2023-10-19 17:33 ` Yosry Ahmed
2023-10-19 18:31 ` Nhat Pham
2023-10-19 18:36 ` Andrew Morton
2023-10-19 19:23 ` Hugh Dickins
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='CAJD7tka2aVKBJj6cYutcVzOGzj_6gop6-ytSmWWML=sEe9qHbA@mail.gmail.com' \
--to=yosryahmed@google.com \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=cerasuolodomenico@gmail.com \
--cc=cgroups@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=ddstreet@ieee.org \
--cc=hannes@cmpxchg.org \
--cc=kernel-team@meta.com \
--cc=linux-doc@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kselftest@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
--cc=mhocko@kernel.org \
--cc=muchun.song@linux.dev \
--cc=nphamcs@gmail.com \
--cc=roman.gushchin@linux.dev \
--cc=shakeelb@google.com \
--cc=shuah@kernel.org \
--cc=sjenning@redhat.com \
--cc=vitaly.wool@konsulko.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.