Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 2620:137:e000::1:20 as permitted sender) client-ip=2620:137:e000::1:20;
Date:   Tue, 19 Apr 2022 17:10:55 -0400
From:   Kent Overstreet <kent.overstreet@gmail.com>
To:     Roman Gushchin <roman.gushchin@linux.dev>
Cc:     linux-mm@kvack.org, Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
        Dave Chinner <dchinner@redhat.com>,
        linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Johannes Weiner <hannes@cmpxchg.org>,
        Michal Hocko <mhocko@kernel.org>,
        Shakeel Butt <shakeelb@google.com>,
        Yang Shi <shy828301@gmail.com>,
        Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH rfc 0/5] mm: introduce shrinker sysfs interface
Message-ID: <20220419211055.jtzfvqagsiwrco6r@moria.home.lan>
References: <20220416002756.4087977-1-roman.gushchin@linux.dev>
 <20220419183654.axbxcjehs6fpqg4z@moria.home.lan>
 <Yl8EhZIbePmlmJ6D@carbon>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <Yl8EhZIbePmlmJ6D@carbon>
Precedence: bulk

On Tue, Apr 19, 2022 at 11:50:45AM -0700, Roman Gushchin wrote:
> On Tue, Apr 19, 2022 at 02:36:54PM -0400, Kent Overstreet wrote:
> > On Fri, Apr 15, 2022 at 05:27:51PM -0700, Roman Gushchin wrote:
> > > 7) Don't display cgroups with less than 500 attached objects
> > >   $ echo 500 > count_memcg
> > >   $ cat count_memcg
> > >     53 817
> > >     1868 886
> > >     2396 799
> > >     2462 861
> > > 
> > > 8) Don't display cgroups with less than 500 attached objects (sum over all nodes)
> > >   $ echo "500" > count_memcg_node
> > >   $ cat count_memcg_node
> > >     53 810 7
> > >     1868 886 0
> > >     2396 799 0
> > >     2462 861 0
> > > 
> > > 9) Scan system/root shrinker
> > >   $ cat count
> > >     212
> > >   $ echo 100 > scan
> > >   $ cat scan
> > >     97
> > >   $ cat count
> > >     115
> > 
> > This part seems entirely overengineered though and a really bad idea - can we
> > please _not_ store query state in the kernel? It's not thread safe, and it seems
> > like overengineering before we've done the basics (just getting this stuff in
> > sysfs is a major improvement!).
> 
> Yes, it's not great, but I don't have a better idea yet. How to return the number
> of freed objects? Do you suggest to drop this functionality at all or there are
> other options I'm not seeing?

I'd just drop all of the stateful stuff - or add an ioctl interface.