[<prev] [next>] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <20221011143015.1152968-1-longman@redhat.com>
Date: Tue, 11 Oct 2022 10:30:15 -0400
From: Waiman Long <longman@...hat.com>
To: Johannes Weiner <hannes@...xchg.org>,
Michal Hocko <mhocko@...nel.org>,
Roman Gushchin <roman.gushchin@...ux.dev>,
Shakeel Butt <shakeelb@...gle.com>,
Muchun Song <songmuchun@...edance.com>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>
Cc: linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, cgroups@...r.kernel.org,
linux-mm@...ck.org, Tejun Heo <tj@...nel.org>,
Chris Down <chris@...isdown.name>,
Waiman Long <longman@...hat.com>
Subject: [PATCH] mm/memcontrol: Don't increase effective low/min if no protection needed
Since commit bc50bcc6e00b ("mm: memcontrol: clean up and document
effective low/min calculations"), the effective low/min protections can
be non-zero even if the corresponding memory.low/min values are 0. That
can surprise users to see MEMCG_LOW events even when the memory.low
value is not set. One example is the LTP's memcontrol04 test which fails
because it detects some MEMCG_LOW events for a cgroup with a memory.min
value of 0.
Fix this by updating effective_protection() to not returning a non-zero
low/min protection values if the corresponding memory.low/min values
or those of its parent are 0.
Fixes: bc50bcc6e00b ("mm: memcontrol: clean up and document effective low/min calculations")
Signed-off-by: Waiman Long <longman@...hat.com>
---
mm/memcontrol.c | 3 +++
1 file changed, 3 insertions(+)
diff --git a/mm/memcontrol.c b/mm/memcontrol.c
index b69979c9ced5..893d4d5e518a 100644
--- a/mm/memcontrol.c
+++ b/mm/memcontrol.c
@@ -6660,6 +6660,9 @@ static unsigned long effective_protection(unsigned long usage,
unsigned long protected;
unsigned long ep;
+ if (!setting || !parent_effective)
+ return 0UL; /* No protection is needed */
+
protected = min(usage, setting);
/*
* If all cgroups at this level combined claim and use more
--
2.31.1
Powered by blists - more mailing lists