Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 23.128.96.31 as permitted sender) client-ip=23.128.96.31;
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <20231019120026.42215-1-wuyun.abel@bytedance.com>
 <20231019120026.42215-3-wuyun.abel@bytedance.com> <69c50d431e2927ce6a6589b4d7a1ed21f0a4586c.camel@redhat.com>
In-Reply-To: <69c50d431e2927ce6a6589b4d7a1ed21f0a4586c.camel@redhat.com>
From:   Shakeel Butt <shakeelb@google.com>
Date:   Tue, 24 Oct 2023 00:35:18 -0700
Message-ID: <CALvZod5EMJcxZgmvUXun29R-PrT-v=18DHpd40QLNweXz71vFw@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH net v3 3/3] sock: Ignore memcg pressure heuristics when
 raising allocated
To:     Paolo Abeni <pabeni@redhat.com>
Cc:     Abel Wu <wuyun.abel@bytedance.com>,
        "David S . Miller" <davem@davemloft.net>,
        Eric Dumazet <edumazet@google.com>,
        Jakub Kicinski <kuba@kernel.org>, netdev@vger.kernel.org,
        linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Precedence: bulk

On Tue, Oct 24, 2023 at 12:08=E2=80=AFAM Paolo Abeni <pabeni@redhat.com> wr=
ote:
>
> On Thu, 2023-10-19 at 20:00 +0800, Abel Wu wrote:
> > Before sockets became aware of net-memcg's memory pressure since
> > commit e1aab161e013 ("socket: initial cgroup code."), the memory
> > usage would be granted to raise if below average even when under
> > protocol's pressure. This provides fairness among the sockets of
> > same protocol.
> >
> > That commit changes this because the heuristic will also be
> > effective when only memcg is under pressure which makes no sense.
> > So revert that behavior.
> >
> > After reverting, __sk_mem_raise_allocated() no longer considers
> > memcg's pressure. As memcgs are isolated from each other w.r.t.
> > memory accounting, consuming one's budget won't affect others.
> > So except the places where buffer sizes are needed to be tuned,
> > allow workloads to use the memory they are provisioned.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Abel Wu <wuyun.abel@bytedance.com>
> > Acked-by: Shakeel Butt <shakeelb@google.com>
> > Acked-by: Paolo Abeni <pabeni@redhat.com>
>
> It's totally not clear to me why you changed the target tree from net-
> next to net ?!? This is net-next material, I asked to strip the fixes
> tag exactly for that reason.
>
> Since there is agreement on this series and we are late in the cycle, I
> would avoid a re-post (we can apply the series to net-next anyway) but
> any clarification on the target tree change will be appreciated,
> thanks!
>

I didn't even notice the change in the target tree. I would say let's
keep this for net-next as there are no urgent fixes here.