Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel+bounces-639-linux.lists.archive=gmail.com@vger.kernel.org designates 2604:1380:45d1:ec00::1 as permitted sender) client-ip=2604:1380:45d1:ec00::1;
Date: Fri, 15 Dec 2023 09:50:04 +0100
From: Michal Hocko <mhocko@suse.com>
To: Dan Schatzberg <schatzberg.dan@gmail.com>
Cc: Johannes Weiner <hannes@cmpxchg.org>,
	Roman Gushchin <roman.gushchin@linux.dev>,
	Yosry Ahmed <yosryahmed@google.com>, Huan Yang <link@vivo.com>,
	linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, cgroups@vger.kernel.org,
	linux-mm@kvack.org, Tejun Heo <tj@kernel.org>,
	Zefan Li <lizefan.x@bytedance.com>,
	Jonathan Corbet <corbet@lwn.net>,
	Shakeel Butt <shakeelb@google.com>,
	Muchun Song <muchun.song@linux.dev>,
	Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
	David Hildenbrand <david@redhat.com>,
	Matthew Wilcox <willy@infradead.org>,
	Kefeng Wang <wangkefeng.wang@huawei.com>,
	Yue Zhao <findns94@gmail.com>, Hugh Dickins <hughd@google.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH V4 2/2] mm: add swapiness= arg to memory.reclaim
Message-ID: <ZXwTPAUn27ShARMG@tiehlicka>
References: <20231213013807.897742-1-schatzberg.dan@gmail.com>
 <20231213013807.897742-3-schatzberg.dan@gmail.com>
 <ZXq_H4St_NSEFkcD@tiehlicka>
 <ZXtH5T+/qs+dUqrz@dschatzberg-fedora-PF3DHTBV>
Precedence: bulk
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <ZXtH5T+/qs+dUqrz@dschatzberg-fedora-PF3DHTBV>

On Thu 14-12-23 13:22:29, Dan Schatzberg wrote:
> On Thu, Dec 14, 2023 at 09:38:55AM +0100, Michal Hocko wrote:
[...]
> > While the review can point those out it is quite easy to break and you
> > will only learn about that very indirectly. I think it would be easier
> > to review and maintain if you go with a pointer that would fallback to
> > mem_cgroup_swappiness() if NULL which will be the case for every
> > existing reclaimer except memory.reclaim with swappiness value.
> 
> I agree. My initial implementation used a pointer for this
> reason. I'll switch this back. Just to be clear - I still need to
> initialize scan_control.swappiness in all these other places right?

No. They will just get initialized to 0. All you need to make sure is
that the swappiness is used consistently. I would propose something like
scan_control_swappiness() (or sc_swappiness) which would actually do

	if (sc->swappiness)
		return sc->swappiness;
	return mem_cgroup_swappiness(sc->target_mem_cgroup);

and then make sure that mem_cgroup_swappiness is never used directly.

-- 
Michal Hocko
SUSE Labs