Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1753186AbbLJLZF (ORCPT ); Thu, 10 Dec 2015 06:25:05 -0500 Received: from mx2.parallels.com ([199.115.105.18]:42801 "EHLO mx2.parallels.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1752194AbbLJLZB (ORCPT ); Thu, 10 Dec 2015 06:25:01 -0500 Date: Thu, 10 Dec 2015 14:24:47 +0300 From: Vladimir Davydov To: Johannes Weiner CC: Arnd Bergmann , Andrew Morton , , , , Subject: Re: [PATCH] mm: memcontrol: MEMCG no longer works with SLOB Message-ID: <20151210112447.GV11488@esperanza> References: <1449588624-9220-1-git-send-email-hannes@cmpxchg.org> <2564892.qO1q7YJ6Nb@wuerfel> <1558902.EBTjGmY9S2@wuerfel> <20151209200107.GA17409@cmpxchg.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20151209200107.GA17409@cmpxchg.org> X-ClientProxiedBy: US-EXCH2.sw.swsoft.com (10.255.249.46) To US-EXCH.sw.swsoft.com (10.255.249.47) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 2735 Lines: 71 On Wed, Dec 09, 2015 at 03:01:07PM -0500, Johannes Weiner wrote: > On Wed, Dec 09, 2015 at 05:32:39PM +0100, Arnd Bergmann wrote: > > The change to move the kmem accounting into the normal memcg > > code means we can no longer use memcg with slob, which lacks > > the memcg_params member in its struct kmem_cache: > > > > ../mm/slab.h: In function 'is_root_cache': > > ../mm/slab.h:187:10: error: 'struct kmem_cache' has no member named 'memcg_params' Argh, I completely forgot about this SLOB thing :-( > > > > This enforces the new dependency in Kconfig. Alternatively, > > we could change the slob code to allow using MEMCG. > > I'm curious, was this a random config or do you actually use > CONFIG_SLOB && CONFIG_MEMCG? > > Excluding CONFIG_MEMCG completely for slob seems harsh, but I would > prefer not littering the source with > > #if defined(CONFIG_MEMCG) && (defined(CONFIG_SLAB) || defined(CONFIG_SLUB)) > > or > > #if defined(CONFIG_MEMCG) && !defined(CONFIG_SLOB) > > for such a special case. The #ifdefs are already out of hand in there. > > Vladimir, what would you think of simply doing this? > > diff --git a/mm/slab.h b/mm/slab.h > index 5adec08..0b3ec4b 100644 > --- a/mm/slab.h > +++ b/mm/slab.h > @@ -25,6 +25,9 @@ struct kmem_cache { > int refcount; /* Use counter */ > void (*ctor)(void *); /* Called on object slot creation */ > struct list_head list; /* List of all slab caches on the system */ > +#ifdef CONFIG_MEMCG > + struct memcg_cache_params memcg_params; > +#endif > }; > > #endif /* CONFIG_SLOB */ I don't like it. This would result in allocation of per memcg arrays for each list_lru/kmem_cache, which would never be used. This looks extremely ugly. I'd prefer to make CONFIG_MEMCG depend on SL[AU]B, but I'm afraid such a change will be frowned upon - who knows who uses MEMCG & SLOB? I guess SLOB could be made memcg-aware, but I don't think it's worth the trouble, although I can take a look in this direction - from a quick glance at SLOB it shouldn't be difficult. If we decide to go this way, I think we could use this patch as a temporary fix, which would be reverted eventually. Otherwise, no matter how tempting the idea to put all memcg stuff under CONFIG_MEMCG is, I think it won't fly, so for now we should use ifdefs. To avoid complex checks, we could define a macro in memcontrol.h, say MEMCG_KMEM_ENABLED, and use it throughout the code. And I think we should wrap list_lru stuff in it either :-/ Thanks, Vladimir -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/