Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel+bounces-16175-linux.lists.archive=gmail.com@vger.kernel.org designates 139.178.88.99 as permitted sender) client-ip=139.178.88.99;
Precedence: bulk
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <20240103164841.2800183-1-schatzberg.dan@gmail.com>
 <20240103164841.2800183-3-schatzberg.dan@gmail.com> <CAOUHufZ-hTwdiy7eYgJWo=CHyPbdxTX60hxjPmwa9Ox6FXMYQQ@mail.gmail.com>
 <ZZWlT5wmDaMceSlQ@dschatzberg-fedora-PC0Y6AEN>
In-Reply-To: <ZZWlT5wmDaMceSlQ@dschatzberg-fedora-PC0Y6AEN>
From: Yu Zhao <yuzhao@google.com>
Date: Wed, 3 Jan 2024 18:17:44 -0700
Message-ID: <CAOUHufZNx7=Oufp5RrJ=GDHDN6RhcZtkBOHeKYbXFzPwVDejXA@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v6 2/2] mm: add swapiness= arg to memory.reclaim
To: Dan Schatzberg <schatzberg.dan@gmail.com>
Cc: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, 
	cgroups@vger.kernel.org, linux-mm@kvack.org, 
	Yosry Ahmed <yosryahmed@google.com>, Michal Hocko <mhocko@suse.com>, 
	David Rientjes <rientjes@google.com>, Chris Li <chrisl@kernel.org>, Tejun Heo <tj@kernel.org>, 
	Zefan Li <lizefan.x@bytedance.com>, Johannes Weiner <hannes@cmpxchg.org>, 
	Jonathan Corbet <corbet@lwn.net>, Michal Hocko <mhocko@kernel.org>, 
	Roman Gushchin <roman.gushchin@linux.dev>, Shakeel Butt <shakeelb@google.com>, 
	Muchun Song <muchun.song@linux.dev>, 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>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

On Wed, Jan 3, 2024 at 11:20=E2=80=AFAM Dan Schatzberg <schatzberg.dan@gmai=
l.com> wrote:
>
> On Wed, Jan 03, 2024 at 10:19:40AM -0700, Yu Zhao wrote:
> [...]
> > > diff --git a/mm/vmscan.c b/mm/vmscan.c
> > > index d91963e2d47f..394e0dd46b2e 100644
> > > --- a/mm/vmscan.c
> > > +++ b/mm/vmscan.c
> > > @@ -92,6 +92,11 @@ struct scan_control {
> > >         unsigned long   anon_cost;
> > >         unsigned long   file_cost;
> > >
> > > +#ifdef CONFIG_MEMCG
> > > +       /* Swappiness value for proactive reclaim. Always use sc_swap=
piness()! */
> > > +       int *proactive_swappiness;
> > > +#endif
> >
> > Why is proactive_swappiness still a pointer? The whole point of the
> > previous conversation is that sc->proactive can tell whether
> > sc->swappiness is valid or not, and that's less awkward than using a
> > pointer.
>
> It's the same reason as before - zero initialization ensures that the
> pointer is NULL which tells us if it's valid or not. Proactive reclaim
> might not set swappiness and you need to distinguish swappiness of 0
> and not-set. See this discussion with Michal:
>
> https://lore.kernel.org/linux-mm/ZZUizpTWOt3gNeqR@tiehlicka/
>
> > Also why the #ifdef here? I don't see the point for a small stack
> > variable. Otherwise wouldn't we want to do this for sc->proactive as
> > well?
>
> This was Michal's request and it feels similar to your rationale for
> naming it proactive_swappiness - it's just restricting the interface
> down to the only use-cases. I'd be fine with doing the same in
> sc->proactive as a subsequent patch.
>
> See https://lore.kernel.org/linux-mm/ZZUhBoTNgL3AUK3f@tiehlicka/

Also regarding #ifdef, quoting Documentation/process/4.Coding.rst:
"As a general rule, #ifdef use should be confined to header files
whenever possible."