Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-nfs-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 23.128.96.18 as permitted sender) client-ip=23.128.96.18;
Date:   Wed, 19 Jan 2022 10:33:11 +0100
From:   Michal =?iso-8859-1?Q?Koutn=FD?= <mkoutny@suse.com>
To:     Muchun Song <songmuchun@bytedance.com>
Cc:     Matthew Wilcox <willy@infradead.org>,
        Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
        Johannes Weiner <hannes@cmpxchg.org>,
        Michal Hocko <mhocko@kernel.org>,
        Vladimir Davydov <vdavydov.dev@gmail.com>,
        Shakeel Butt <shakeelb@google.com>,
        Roman Gushchin <guro@fb.com>, Yang Shi <shy828301@gmail.com>,
        Alex Shi <alexs@kernel.org>,
        Wei Yang <richard.weiyang@gmail.com>,
        Dave Chinner <david@fromorbit.com>,
        trond.myklebust@hammerspace.com, anna.schumaker@netapp.com,
        jaegeuk@kernel.org, chao@kernel.org,
        Kari Argillander <kari.argillander@gmail.com>,
        linux-fsdevel <linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org>,
        LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
        Linux Memory Management List <linux-mm@kvack.org>,
        linux-nfs@vger.kernel.org, Qi Zheng <zhengqi.arch@bytedance.com>,
        Xiongchun duan <duanxiongchun@bytedance.com>,
        Fam Zheng <fam.zheng@bytedance.com>,
        Muchun Song <smuchun@gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v5 10/16] mm: list_lru: allocate list_lru_one only when
 needed
Message-ID: <20220119093311.GD15686@blackbody.suse.cz>
References: <20211220085649.8196-1-songmuchun@bytedance.com>
 <20211220085649.8196-11-songmuchun@bytedance.com>
 <20220106110051.GA470@blackbody.suse.cz>
 <CAMZfGtXZA+rLMUw5yLSW=eUncT0BjH++Dpi1EzKwXvV9zwqF1w@mail.gmail.com>
 <20220113133213.GA28468@blackbody.suse.cz>
 <CAMZfGtWJeov9XD_MEkDJwTK5b73OKPYxJBQi=D5-NSyNSSKLCw@mail.gmail.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <CAMZfGtWJeov9XD_MEkDJwTK5b73OKPYxJBQi=D5-NSyNSSKLCw@mail.gmail.com>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.10.1 (2018-07-13)
Precedence: bulk

On Tue, Jan 18, 2022 at 08:05:44PM +0800, Muchun Song <songmuchun@bytedance.com> wrote:
> I have thought about this. It's a little different to rely on objcg
> reparenting since the user can get memcg from objcg and
> then does not realize the memcg has reparented.

When you pointed that out, I'm now also wondering how
memcg_list_lru_alloc() would be synchronized against
reparenting/renumbering of kmemcg_ids. What I suspect is that newly
allocated mlru may be stored into the xarray with a stale kmemcg_id.

> Maybe holding css_set_lock can do that. I do not think this
> is a good choice.

I agree, it doesn't sound well.

> Do you have any thoughts about this?

Thoughts / questions of what I don't undestand well:
- Why do you allocate mlrus for all ancestors in memcg_list_lru_alloc()?
  - It'd be sufficient to allocate just for the current memcg.
  - Possibly allocate ancestors upon reparenting (to simplify the
    allocation from slab_pre_alloc_hook itself).
    
- What is the per-kmemcg_id lookup good for?
  - I observe most calls of list_lru_from_memcg_idx() come from callers
    that know memcg (or even objcg).
  - The non-specific use case seems list_lru_walk_node() working with
    per-node and not per-memcg projection.
    - Consequently that is only used over all nodes anyway
      (list_lru_walk().
  - The idea behind this question is -- attach the list_lrus to
    obj_cgroup (and decomission the kmemcg_id completely).
    (Not necessarily part of this series but independent approach.)

Thanks,
Michal