From: Roman Gushchin <guro@fb.com>
To: Johannes Weiner <hannes@cmpxchg.org>
Cc: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
Michal Hocko <mhocko@suse.com>, Tejun Heo <tj@kernel.org>,
"linux-mm@kvack.org" <linux-mm@kvack.org>,
"cgroups@vger.kernel.org" <cgroups@vger.kernel.org>,
"linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
Kernel Team <Kernel-team@fb.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 0/3] mm: memcontrol: recursive memory protection
Date: Fri, 20 Dec 2019 04:06:22 +0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20191220040618.GA8069@localhost.localdomain> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20191219200718.15696-1-hannes@cmpxchg.org>
On Thu, Dec 19, 2019 at 03:07:15PM -0500, Johannes Weiner wrote:
> Changes since v1:
> - improved Changelogs based on the discussion with Roman. Thanks!
> - fix div0 when recursive & fixed protection is combined
> - fix an unused compiler warning
>
> The current memory.low (and memory.min) semantics require protection
> to be assigned to a cgroup in an untinterrupted chain from the
> top-level cgroup all the way to the leaf.
>
> In practice, we want to protect entire cgroup subtrees from each other
> (system management software vs. workload), but we would like the VM to
> balance memory optimally *within* each subtree, without having to make
> explicit weight allocations among individual components. The current
> semantics make that impossible.
>
> This patch series extends memory.low/min such that the knobs apply
> recursively to the entire subtree. Users can still assign explicit
> protection to subgroups, but if they don't, the protection set by the
> parent cgroup will be distributed dynamically such that children
> compete freely - as if no memory control were enabled inside the
> subtree - but enjoy protection from neighboring trees.
>
> Patch #1 fixes an existing bug that can give a cgroup tree more
> protection than it should receive as per ancestor configuration.
>
> Patch #2 simplifies and documents the existing code to make it easier
> to reason about the changes in the next patch.
>
> Patch #3 finally implements recursive memory protection semantics.
>
> Because of a risk of regressing legacy setups, the new semantics are
> hidden behind a cgroup2 mount option, 'memory_recursiveprot'.
I really like the new semantics: it looks nice and doesn't require
any new magic values aka "bypass", which have been discussed previously.
The ability to disable the protection for a particular cgroup inside
the protected sub-tree looks overvalued: I don't have any practical
example when it makes any sense. So it's totally worth it to sacrifice
it. Thank you for adding comments to the changelog!
Acked-by: Roman Gushchin <guro@fb.com>
for the series.
Thanks!
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2019-12-20 4:06 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 52+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2019-12-19 20:07 [PATCH v2 0/3] mm: memcontrol: recursive memory protection Johannes Weiner
2019-12-19 20:07 ` [PATCH v2 1/3] mm: memcontrol: fix memory.low proportional distribution Johannes Weiner
2020-01-30 11:49 ` Michal Hocko
2020-02-03 21:21 ` Johannes Weiner
2020-02-03 21:38 ` Roman Gushchin
2019-12-19 20:07 ` [PATCH v2 2/3] mm: memcontrol: clean up and document effective low/min calculations Johannes Weiner
2020-01-30 12:54 ` Michal Hocko
2020-02-21 17:10 ` Michal Koutný
2020-02-25 18:40 ` Johannes Weiner
2020-02-26 16:46 ` Michal Koutný
2020-02-26 19:40 ` Johannes Weiner
2019-12-19 20:07 ` [PATCH v2 3/3] mm: memcontrol: recursive memory.low protection Johannes Weiner
2020-01-30 17:00 ` Michal Hocko
2020-02-03 21:52 ` Johannes Weiner
2020-02-10 15:21 ` Johannes Weiner
2020-02-11 16:47 ` Michal Hocko
2020-02-12 17:08 ` Johannes Weiner
2020-02-13 7:40 ` Michal Hocko
2020-02-13 13:23 ` Johannes Weiner
2020-02-13 15:46 ` Michal Hocko
2020-02-13 17:41 ` Johannes Weiner
2020-02-13 17:58 ` Johannes Weiner
2020-02-14 7:59 ` Michal Hocko
2020-02-13 13:53 ` Tejun Heo
2020-02-13 15:47 ` Michal Hocko
2020-02-13 15:52 ` Tejun Heo
2020-02-13 16:36 ` Michal Hocko
2020-02-13 16:57 ` Tejun Heo
2020-02-14 7:15 ` Michal Hocko
2020-02-14 13:57 ` Tejun Heo
2020-02-14 15:13 ` Michal Hocko
2020-02-14 15:40 ` Tejun Heo
2020-02-14 16:53 ` Johannes Weiner
2020-02-14 17:17 ` Tejun Heo
2020-02-17 8:41 ` Michal Hocko
2020-02-18 19:52 ` Johannes Weiner
2020-02-21 10:11 ` Michal Hocko
2020-02-21 15:43 ` Johannes Weiner
2020-02-25 12:20 ` Michal Hocko
2020-02-25 18:17 ` Johannes Weiner
2020-02-26 17:56 ` Michal Hocko
2020-02-21 17:12 ` Michal Koutný
2020-02-21 18:58 ` Johannes Weiner
2020-02-25 13:37 ` Michal Koutný
2020-02-25 15:03 ` Johannes Weiner
2020-02-26 13:22 ` Michal Koutný
2020-02-26 15:05 ` Johannes Weiner
2020-02-27 13:35 ` Michal Koutný
2020-02-27 15:06 ` Johannes Weiner
2019-12-19 20:22 ` [PATCH v2 0/3] mm: memcontrol: recursive memory protection Tejun Heo
2019-12-20 4:06 ` Roman Gushchin [this message]
2019-12-20 4:29 ` Chris Down
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=20191220040618.GA8069@localhost.localdomain \
--to=guro@fb.com \
--cc=Kernel-team@fb.com \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=cgroups@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=hannes@cmpxchg.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
--cc=mhocko@suse.com \
--cc=tj@kernel.org \
/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;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).