Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 23.128.96.18 as permitted sender) client-ip=23.128.96.18;
Date:   Wed, 26 Aug 2020 19:17:25 +0100
From:   Chris Down <chris@chrisdown.name>
To:     Xunlei Pang <xlpang@linux.alibaba.com>
Cc:     Johannes Weiner <hannes@cmpxchg.org>,
        Michal Hocko <mhocko@kernel.org>,
        Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
        Vladimir Davydov <vdavydov.dev@gmail.com>,
        linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-mm@kvack.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] mm: memcg: Fix memcg reclaim soft lockup
Message-ID: <20200826181725.GA893402@chrisdown.name>
References: <1598449622-108748-1-git-send-email-xlpang@linux.alibaba.com>
 <20200826141044.GA831829@chrisdown.name>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <20200826141044.GA831829@chrisdown.name>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.14.6 (2020-07-11)
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Precedence: bulk

Chris Down writes:
>Xunlei Pang writes:
>>Add cond_resched() at the upper shrink_node_memcgs() to solve this
>>issue, and any other possible issue like meomry.min protection.
>
>I understand the general intent of the patch, but could you clarify 
>your concern around memory protection?

Oh, I see, your concern is just preemption in general rather than a fixing 
anything for the memory protection side. In which case, go for it, but I agree 
with Michael that it would be nice to send v3 with a clarifying comment.

Acked-by: Chris Down <chris@chrisdown.name>