From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1753519AbdKINyr (ORCPT ); Thu, 9 Nov 2017 08:54:47 -0500 Received: from mx2.suse.de ([195.135.220.15]:36353 "EHLO mx2.suse.de" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751528AbdKINyq (ORCPT ); Thu, 9 Nov 2017 08:54:46 -0500 Date: Thu, 9 Nov 2017 14:54:44 +0100 From: Michal Hocko To: Jan Kara Cc: Yang Shi , amir73il@gmail.com, linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org, linux-mm@kvack.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] fs: fsnotify: account fsnotify metadata to kmemcg Message-ID: <20171109135444.znaksm4fucmpuylf@dhcp22.suse.cz> References: <1509128538-50162-1-git-send-email-yang.s@alibaba-inc.com> <20171030124358.GF23278@quack2.suse.cz> <76a4d544-833a-5f42-a898-115640b6783b@alibaba-inc.com> <20171031101238.GD8989@quack2.suse.cz> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20171031101238.GD8989@quack2.suse.cz> User-Agent: NeoMutt/20170609 (1.8.3) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org [Sorry for the late reply] On Tue 31-10-17 11:12:38, Jan Kara wrote: > On Tue 31-10-17 00:39:58, Yang Shi wrote: [...] > > I do agree it is not fair and not neat to account to producer rather than > > misbehaving consumer, but current memcg design looks not support such use > > case. And, the other question is do we know who is the listener if it > > doesn't read the events? > > So you never know who will read from the notification file descriptor but > you can simply account that to the process that created the notification > group and that is IMO the right process to account to. Yes, if the creator is de-facto owner which defines the lifetime of those objects then this should be a target of the charge. > I agree that current SLAB memcg accounting does not allow to account to a > different memcg than the one of the running process. However I *think* it > should be possible to add such interface. Michal? We do have memcg_kmem_charge_memcg but that would require some plumbing to hook it into the specific allocation path. I suspect it uses kmalloc, right? -- Michal Hocko SUSE Labs