[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20200219193711.GC54486@cmpxchg.org>
Date: Wed, 19 Feb 2020 14:37:11 -0500
From: Johannes Weiner <hannes@...xchg.org>
To: Chris Down <chris@...isdown.name>
Cc: Dan Schatzberg <dschatzberg@...com>, Jens Axboe <axboe@...nel.dk>,
Tejun Heo <tj@...nel.org>, Li Zefan <lizefan@...wei.com>,
Michal Hocko <mhocko@...nel.org>,
Vladimir Davydov <vdavydov.dev@...il.com>,
Hugh Dickins <hughd@...gle.com>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
Roman Gushchin <guro@...com>,
Shakeel Butt <shakeelb@...gle.com>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
"open list:BLOCK LAYER" <linux-block@...r.kernel.org>,
open list <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
"open list:CONTROL GROUP (CGROUP)" <cgroups@...r.kernel.org>,
"open list:CONTROL GROUP - MEMORY RESOURCE CONTROLLER (MEMCG)"
<linux-mm@...ck.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 2/3] mm: Charge active memcg when no mm is set
On Fri, Feb 07, 2020 at 09:18:07PM +0000, Chris Down wrote:
> > @@ -6856,8 +6857,12 @@ int mem_cgroup_try_charge(struct page *page, struct mm_struct *mm,
> > }
> > }
> >
> > - if (!memcg)
> > - memcg = get_mem_cgroup_from_mm(mm);
> > + if (!memcg) {
> > + if (!mm)
> > + memcg = get_mem_cgroup_from_current();
> > + else
> > + memcg = get_mem_cgroup_from_mm(mm);
> > + }
>
> Just to do due diligence, did we double check whether this results in any
> unintentional shift in accounting for those passing in both mm and memcg as
> NULL with no current->active_memcg set, since previously we never even tried
> to consult current->mm and always used root_mem_cgroup in
> get_mem_cgroup_from_mm?
Excellent question on a subtle issue.
But nobody actually passes NULL. They either pass current->mm (or a
destination mm) in syscalls, or vma->vm_mm in page faults.
The only times we end up with NULL is when kernel threads do something
and have !current->mm. We redirect those to root_mem_cgroup.
So this patch doesn't change those semantics.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists