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:   Tue, 20 Apr 2021 13:04:04 +0200
From:   Michal Hocko <mhocko@suse.com>
To:     Peter.Enderborg@sony.com
Cc:     christian.koenig@amd.com, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
        linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org, sumit.semwal@linaro.org,
        adobriyan@gmail.com, akpm@linux-foundation.org,
        songmuchun@bytedance.com, guro@fb.com, shakeelb@google.com,
        neilb@suse.de, samitolvanen@google.com, rppt@kernel.org,
        linux-media@vger.kernel.org, dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org,
        linaro-mm-sig@lists.linaro.org, willy@infradead.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v4] dma-buf: Add DmaBufTotal counter in meminfo
Message-ID: <YH61JJOlLwBwHqVL@dhcp22.suse.cz>
References: <23aa041b-0e7c-6f82-5655-836899973d66@sony.com>
 <d70efba0-c63d-b55a-c234-eb6d82ae813f@amd.com>
 <YH2ru642wYfqK5ne@dhcp22.suse.cz>
 <07ed1421-89f8-8845-b254-21730207c185@amd.com>
 <YH59E15ztpTTUKqS@dhcp22.suse.cz>
 <b89c84da-65d2-35df-7249-ea8edc0bee9b@amd.com>
 <YH6GyThr2mPrM6h5@dhcp22.suse.cz>
 <5efa2b11-850b-ad89-b518-b776247748a4@sony.com>
 <YH6bASnaRIV4DGpI@dhcp22.suse.cz>
 <532d6d7e-372c-1524-d015-e15d79fcf11c@sony.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <532d6d7e-372c-1524-d015-e15d79fcf11c@sony.com>
Precedence: bulk

On Tue 20-04-21 09:25:51, Peter.Enderborg@sony.com wrote:
> On 4/20/21 11:12 AM, Michal Hocko wrote:
> > On Tue 20-04-21 09:02:57, Peter.Enderborg@sony.com wrote:
> >>>> But that isn't really system memory at all, it's just allocated device
> >>>> memory.
> >>> OK, that was not really clear to me. So this is not really accounted to
> >>> MemTotal? If that is really the case then reporting it into the oom
> >>> report is completely pointless and I am not even sure /proc/meminfo is
> >>> the right interface either. It would just add more confusion I am
> >>> afraid.
> >>>  
> >> Why is it confusing? Documentation is quite clear:
> > Because a single counter without a wider context cannot be put into any
> > reasonable context. There is no notion of the total amount of device
> > memory usable for dma-buf. As Christian explained some of it can be RAM
> > based. So a single number is rather pointless on its own in many cases.
> >
> > Or let me just ask. What can you tell from dma-bud: $FOO kB in its
> > current form?
> 
> It is better to be blind?

No it is better to have a sensible counter that can be reasoned about.
So far you are only claiming that having something is better than
nothing and I would agree with you if that was a debugging one off
interface. But /proc/meminfo and other proc files have to be maintained
with future portability in mind. This is not a dumping ground for _some_
counters that might be interesting at the _current_ moment. E.g. what
happens if somebody wants to have a per device resp. memory based
dma-buf data? Are you going to change the semantic or add another
2 counters?
-- 
Michal Hocko
SUSE Labs