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:   Mon, 21 Sep 2020 12:31:12 -0400
From:   Peter Xu <peterx@redhat.com>
To:     Michal Hocko <mhocko@suse.com>
Cc:     Christian Brauner <christian.brauner@ubuntu.com>,
        Tejun Heo <tj@kernel.org>,
        Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>,
        Jason Gunthorpe <jgg@ziepe.ca>,
        John Hubbard <jhubbard@nvidia.com>,
        Leon Romanovsky <leonro@nvidia.com>,
        Linux-MM <linux-mm@kvack.org>,
        Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
        "Maya B . Gokhale" <gokhale2@llnl.gov>,
        Yang Shi <yang.shi@linux.alibaba.com>,
        Marty Mcfadden <mcfadden8@llnl.gov>,
        Kirill Shutemov <kirill@shutemov.name>,
        Oleg Nesterov <oleg@redhat.com>, Jann Horn <jannh@google.com>,
        Jan Kara <jack@suse.cz>, Kirill Tkhai <ktkhai@virtuozzo.com>,
        Andrea Arcangeli <aarcange@redhat.com>,
        Christoph Hellwig <hch@lst.de>,
        Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/4] mm: Trial do_wp_page() simplification
Message-ID: <20200921163112.GF5962@xz-x1>
References: <20200916174804.GC8409@ziepe.ca>
 <20200916184619.GB40154@xz-x1>
 <20200917112538.GD8409@ziepe.ca>
 <CAHk-=wjtfjB3TqTFRzVmOrB9Mii6Yzc-=wKq0fu4ruDE6AsJgg@mail.gmail.com>
 <20200917193824.GL8409@ziepe.ca>
 <CAHk-=wiY_g+SSjncZi8sO=LrxXmMox0NO7K34-Fs653XVXheGg@mail.gmail.com>
 <20200918164032.GA5962@xz-x1>
 <20200921134200.GK12990@dhcp22.suse.cz>
 <20200921144134.fuvkkv6wgrzpbwnv@wittgenstein>
 <20200921145738.GN12990@dhcp22.suse.cz>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <20200921145738.GN12990@dhcp22.suse.cz>
Precedence: bulk

On Mon, Sep 21, 2020 at 04:57:38PM +0200, Michal Hocko wrote:
> Switching the order wouldn't make much of a difference right. At least
> not for memcg where all the accounted allocations will still go to
> current's memcg.

I think I'll make it simple to charge the parent directly just like what we do
right now.  I do expect that the charged amount could be quite some when
there're a lot pinned pages on the parent process, however hopefully it's
acceptable as it's still a very rare case, and proper MADV_DONTFORK upon pinned
pages on the parent process will eliminate all these charges too.

I actually already prepared some patches.  It's definitely bigger than expected
due to the complexity that we held page table locks in copy_one_pte() when
trying to break the cow pages.  I don't know whether it would be proper any
more for rc, especially the ending of rcs.  Anyway I'll post them out soon
after I did some basic tests, because I think that's something right to do
irrelevant to when it will be merged.

Thanks,

-- 
Peter Xu