Received-SPF: softfail (google.com: domain of transitioning linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org does not designate 23.128.96.19 as permitted sender) client-ip=23.128.96.19;
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <YmdeCqi6wmgiSiWh@carbon> <33085523-a8b9-1bf6-2726-f456f59015ef@openvz.org>
 <CALvZod4oaj9MpBDVUp9KGmnqu4F3UxjXgOLkrkvmRfFjA7F1dw@mail.gmail.com> <20220427122232.GA9823@blackbody.suse.cz>
In-Reply-To: <20220427122232.GA9823@blackbody.suse.cz>
From:   Shakeel Butt <shakeelb@google.com>
Date:   Wed, 27 Apr 2022 08:06:10 -0700
Message-ID: <CALvZod7v0taU51TNRu=OM5iJ-bnm1ryu9shjs80PuE-SWobqFg@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH memcg v4] net: set proper memcg for net_init hooks allocations
To:     =?UTF-8?Q?Michal_Koutn=C3=BD?= <mkoutny@suse.com>
Cc:     Vasily Averin <vvs@openvz.org>, Vlastimil Babka <vbabka@suse.cz>,
        Roman Gushchin <roman.gushchin@linux.dev>, kernel@openvz.org,
        Florian Westphal <fw@strlen.de>,
        LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
        Michal Hocko <mhocko@suse.com>,
        Cgroups <cgroups@vger.kernel.org>,
        netdev <netdev@vger.kernel.org>,
        "David S. Miller" <davem@davemloft.net>,
        Jakub Kicinski <kuba@kernel.org>,
        Paolo Abeni <pabeni@redhat.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Precedence: bulk

On Wed, Apr 27, 2022 at 5:22 AM Michal Koutn=C3=BD <mkoutny@suse.com> wrote=
:
>
> On Tue, Apr 26, 2022 at 10:23:32PM -0700, Shakeel Butt <shakeelb@google.c=
om> wrote:
> > [...]
> > >
> > > +static inline struct mem_cgroup *get_mem_cgroup_from_obj(void *p)
> > > +{
> > > +       struct mem_cgroup *memcg;
> > > +
> >
> > Do we need memcg_kmem_enabled() check here or maybe
> > mem_cgroup_from_obj() should be doing memcg_kmem_enabled() instead of
> > mem_cgroup_disabled() as we can have "cgroup.memory=3Dnokmem" boot
> > param.
>
> I reckon such a guard is on the charge side and readers should treat
> NULL and root_mem_group equally. Or is there a case when these two are
> different?
>
> (I can see it's different semantics when stored in current->active_memcg
> (and active_memcg() getter) but for such "outer" callers like here it
> seems equal.)

I was more thinking about possible shortcut optimization and unrelated
to this patch.

Vasily, can you please add documentation for get_mem_cgroup_from_obj()
similar to get_mem_cgroup_from_mm()? Also for mem_cgroup_or_root().
Please note that root_mem_cgroup can be NULL during early boot.