From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org>
Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand
        id S1754080AbeDFPWU (ORCPT <rfc822;w@1wt.eu>);
        Fri, 6 Apr 2018 11:22:20 -0400
Received: from mail-wr0-f193.google.com ([209.85.128.193]:42525 "EHLO
        mail-wr0-f193.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org
        with ESMTP id S1752238AbeDFPWS (ORCPT
        <rfc822;linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>);
        Fri, 6 Apr 2018 11:22:18 -0400
X-Google-Smtp-Source: AIpwx4+NeUDz3Y04dCjbONnF2TWGf6Pmb25aKl0Z2IcuNhZBiYnZEf1fAy34IIGCO4uEQJHax9GbMRiEr5io+6OiTMc=
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <406e02a5-16d4-7cd3-de01-24bee60eab02@virtuozzo.com>
References: <CALvZod7P7cE38fDrWd=0caA2J6ZOmSzEuLGQH9VSaagCbo5O+A@mail.gmail.com>
 <20180406135215.10057-1-aryabinin@virtuozzo.com> <CALvZod7bGjx-fUKZ15oVAkXkeneZjtoRFiUSpKSZ1U0DA_e1BA@mail.gmail.com>
 <406e02a5-16d4-7cd3-de01-24bee60eab02@virtuozzo.com>
From: Shakeel Butt <shakeelb@google.com>
Date: Fri, 6 Apr 2018 08:22:15 -0700
Message-ID: <CALvZod4jmJp26=TB1hXrKb59DVEKOeJV9moKas=6Dcuvkq9ZZQ@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] mm-vmscan-dont-mess-with-pgdat-flags-in-memcg-reclaim-v2-fix
To: Andrey Ryabinin <aryabinin@virtuozzo.com>
Cc: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
        Mel Gorman <mgorman@techsingularity.net>, Tejun Heo <tj@kernel.org>,
        Johannes Weiner <hannes@cmpxchg.org>, Michal Hocko <mhocko@kernel.org>,
        Linux MM <linux-mm@kvack.org>, LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
        Cgroups <cgroups@vger.kernel.org>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
List-ID: <linux-kernel.vger.kernel.org>
X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org

On Fri, Apr 6, 2018 at 8:09 AM, Andrey Ryabinin <aryabinin@virtuozzo.com> wrote:
>
>
> On 04/06/2018 05:37 PM, Shakeel Butt wrote:
>
>>>
>>> @@ -2482,7 +2494,7 @@ static inline bool should_continue_reclaim(struct pglist_data *pgdat,
>>>  static bool pgdat_memcg_congested(pg_data_t *pgdat, struct mem_cgroup *memcg)
>>>  {
>>>         return test_bit(PGDAT_CONGESTED, &pgdat->flags) ||
>>> -               (memcg && test_memcg_bit(PGDAT_CONGESTED, memcg));
>>> +               (memcg && memcg_congested(pgdat, memcg));
>>
>> I am wondering if we should check all ancestors for congestion as
>> well. Maybe a parallel memcg reclaimer might have set some ancestor of
>> this memcg to congested.
>>
>
> Why? If ancestor is congested but its child (the one we currently reclaim) is not,
> it could mean only 2 things:
>  - Either child use mostly anon and inactive file lru is small (file_lru >> priority == 0)
>    so it's not congested.
>  - Or the child was congested recently (at the time when ancestor scanned this group),
>    but not anymore. So the information from ancestor is simply outdated.
>

Oh yeah, you explained in the other email as well. Thanks.

I think Andrew will squash this patch with the previous one. Andrew,
please add following in the squashed patch.

Reviewed-by: Shakeel Butt <shakeelb@google.com>