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, 14 Sep 2021 09:13:48 +0200
From:   Michal Hocko <mhocko@suse.com>
To:     Shakeel Butt <shakeelb@google.com>
Cc:     Vasily Averin <vvs@virtuozzo.com>,
        Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
        Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>,
        LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
        Johannes Weiner <hannes@cmpxchg.org>, kernel@openvz.org,
        Cgroups <cgroups@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] ipc: remove memcg accounting for sops objects in
 do_semtimedop()
Message-ID: <YUBLrJOL6DGxmira@dhcp22.suse.cz>
References: <90e254df-0dfe-f080-011e-b7c53ee7fd20@virtuozzo.com>
 <YT8NrsaztWNDpKXk@dhcp22.suse.cz>
 <CALvZod7Y4pC4XvqVp+tJ==CnS5Ay8YPqrxeUzA8tMLu+0U3hjQ@mail.gmail.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <CALvZod7Y4pC4XvqVp+tJ==CnS5Ay8YPqrxeUzA8tMLu+0U3hjQ@mail.gmail.com>
Precedence: bulk

On Mon 13-09-21 21:32:25, Shakeel Butt wrote:
> On Mon, Sep 13, 2021 at 1:37 AM Michal Hocko <mhocko@suse.com> wrote:
> >
> [...]
> > > However Shakeel Butt pointed that there are much more popular objects
> > > with the same life time and similar memory consumption, the accounting
> > > of which was decided to be rejected for performance reasons.
> >
> > Is there any measurable performance impact in this particular case?
> >
> 
> I don't think there was any regression report or any performance
> evaluation. Linus raised the concern on the potential performance
> impact. I suggested to backoff for this allocation for now and revisit
> again once we have improved the memcg accounting for kernel memory.

I am fine with the change, I am just not satisfied with the
justification. It is not really clear what the intention is except that
Linus wanted it. I have already asked Vasily to provide more
explanation. E.g. this part really begs for clarification
"
This object can consume up to 2 pages, syscall is sleeping one,
size and duration can be controlled by user, and this allocation
can be repeated by many thread at the same time.
"

It sounds like a problem, except it is not because? A worst case
scenario evaluation would be beneficial for example

Thanks!

-- 
Michal Hocko
SUSE Labs