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 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-15.8 required=3.0 tests=BAYES_00,DKIM_SIGNED, DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,INCLUDES_CR_TRAILER, INCLUDES_PATCH,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS,URIBL_BLOCKED autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 988C5C433E0 for ; Thu, 18 Feb 2021 08:24:59 +0000 (UTC) Received: from kanga.kvack.org (kanga.kvack.org [205.233.56.17]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 353F064E5F for ; Thu, 18 Feb 2021 08:24:59 +0000 (UTC) DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.3.2 mail.kernel.org 353F064E5F Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dmarc=fail (p=quarantine dis=none) header.from=suse.com Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=owner-linux-mm@kvack.org Received: by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix) id AC8568D0001; Thu, 18 Feb 2021 03:24:58 -0500 (EST) Received: by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix, from userid 40) id A78146B006E; Thu, 18 Feb 2021 03:24:58 -0500 (EST) X-Delivered-To: int-list-linux-mm@kvack.org Received: by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix, from userid 63042) id 940B48D0001; Thu, 18 Feb 2021 03:24:58 -0500 (EST) X-Delivered-To: linux-mm@kvack.org Received: from forelay.hostedemail.com (smtprelay0143.hostedemail.com [216.40.44.143]) by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7A81C6B006C for ; Thu, 18 Feb 2021 03:24:58 -0500 (EST) Received: from smtpin26.hostedemail.com (10.5.19.251.rfc1918.com [10.5.19.251]) by forelay01.hostedemail.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4DEA4180AD830 for ; Thu, 18 Feb 2021 08:24:58 +0000 (UTC) X-FDA: 77830703076.26.nose62_2f1096127653 Received: from filter.hostedemail.com (10.5.16.251.rfc1918.com [10.5.16.251]) by smtpin26.hostedemail.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3166F1804B66A for ; Thu, 18 Feb 2021 08:24:58 +0000 (UTC) X-HE-Tag: nose62_2f1096127653 X-Filterd-Recvd-Size: 3590 Received: from mx2.suse.de (mx2.suse.de [195.135.220.15]) by imf44.hostedemail.com (Postfix) with ESMTP for ; Thu, 18 Feb 2021 08:24:57 +0000 (UTC) X-Virus-Scanned: by amavisd-new at test-mx.suse.de DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=suse.com; s=susede1; t=1613636696; 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=KUTYu5268imgiklm3bMZR/IfsonyJHTyi5EUt0/rAyg=; b=iA+FoNDqGJJyNKtrQaOYMuz2zt2bVm9M0Jbw7OFp5H7WPLCYJ+S5i7/An/7VTj2rxjQyOj 6RCbmW8ACQ9JNr0EIN2W7nefIfXopiOgBFGS/gACHv3vLHu5KHwpQMezQMz9YLHkYgqB7l PB0f6FnQeAe8E5zL2G2CKFoX+bgg4WA= Received: from relay2.suse.de (unknown [195.135.221.27]) by mx2.suse.de (Postfix) with ESMTP id 98F7EACD9; Thu, 18 Feb 2021 08:24:56 +0000 (UTC) Date: Thu, 18 Feb 2021 09:24:55 +0100 From: Michal Hocko To: Tim Chen Cc: Andrew Morton , Johannes Weiner , Vladimir Davydov , Dave Hansen , Ying Huang , linux-mm@kvack.org, cgroups@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 1/3] mm: Fix dropped memcg from mem cgroup soft limit tree Message-ID: References: <8d35206601ccf0e1fe021d24405b2a0c2f4e052f.1613584277.git.tim.c.chen@linux.intel.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <8d35206601ccf0e1fe021d24405b2a0c2f4e052f.1613584277.git.tim.c.chen@linux.intel.com> 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 Wed 17-02-21 12:41:34, Tim Chen wrote: > During soft limit memory reclaim, we will temporarily remove the target > mem cgroup from the cgroup soft limit tree. We then perform memory > reclaim, update the memory usage excess count and re-insert the mem > cgroup back into the mem cgroup soft limit tree according to the new > memory usage excess count. > > However, when memory reclaim failed for a maximum number of attempts > and we bail out of the reclaim loop, we forgot to put the target mem > cgroup chosen for next reclaim back to the soft limit tree. This prevented > pages in the mem cgroup from being reclaimed in the future even though > the mem cgroup exceeded its soft limit. Fix the logic and put the mem > cgroup back on the tree when page reclaim failed for the mem cgroup. > > Reviewed-by: Ying Huang > Signed-off-by: Tim Chen I have already acked this patch in the previous version along with Fixes tag. It seems that my review feedback has been completely ignored also for other patches in this series. > --- > mm/memcontrol.c | 6 +++++- > 1 file changed, 5 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) > > diff --git a/mm/memcontrol.c b/mm/memcontrol.c > index ed5cc78a8dbf..a51bf90732cb 100644 > --- a/mm/memcontrol.c > +++ b/mm/memcontrol.c > @@ -3505,8 +3505,12 @@ unsigned long mem_cgroup_soft_limit_reclaim(pg_data_t *pgdat, int order, > loop > MEM_CGROUP_MAX_SOFT_LIMIT_RECLAIM_LOOPS)) > break; > } while (!nr_reclaimed); > - if (next_mz) > + if (next_mz) { > + spin_lock_irq(&mctz->lock); > + __mem_cgroup_insert_exceeded(next_mz, mctz, excess); > + spin_unlock_irq(&mctz->lock); > css_put(&next_mz->memcg->css); > + } > return nr_reclaimed; > } > > -- > 2.20.1 -- Michal Hocko SUSE Labs