Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 23.128.96.33 as permitted sender) client-ip=23.128.96.33;
Message-ID: <b2bde6a6-a242-4eeb-9a65-4081e8ac5df7@bytedance.com>
Date:   Tue, 24 Oct 2023 16:21:25 +0800
MIME-Version: 1.0
User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird
Subject: Re: Re: [PATCH net v3 3/3] sock: Ignore memcg pressure heuristics
 when raising allocated
To:     Paolo Abeni <pabeni@redhat.com>,
        "David S . Miller" <davem@davemloft.net>,
        Eric Dumazet <edumazet@google.com>,
        Jakub Kicinski <kuba@kernel.org>,
        Shakeel Butt <shakeelb@google.com>
Cc:     netdev@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
References: <20231019120026.42215-1-wuyun.abel@bytedance.com>
 <20231019120026.42215-3-wuyun.abel@bytedance.com>
 <69c50d431e2927ce6a6589b4d7a1ed21f0a4586c.camel@redhat.com>
Content-Language: en-US
From:   Abel Wu <wuyun.abel@bytedance.com>
In-Reply-To: <69c50d431e2927ce6a6589b4d7a1ed21f0a4586c.camel@redhat.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Precedence: bulk

On 10/24/23 3:08 PM, Paolo Abeni Wrote:
> 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.

Sorry I misunderstood your suggestion..

> 
> 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!

Please apply to net-next.

Thanks!
	Abel