lists.openwall.net   lists  /  announce  owl-users  owl-dev  john-users  john-dev  passwdqc-users  yescrypt  popa3d-users  /  oss-security  kernel-hardening  musl  sabotage  tlsify  passwords  /  crypt-dev  xvendor  /  Bugtraq  Full-Disclosure  linux-kernel  linux-netdev  linux-ext4  linux-hardening  linux-cve-announce  PHC 
Open Source and information security mailing list archives
 
Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.
[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <00f47523-e458-4e9e-8354-1c33bf0591b8@linux.dev>
Date: Mon, 22 Dec 2025 11:55:01 +0800
From: Qi Zheng <qi.zheng@...ux.dev>
To: Johannes Weiner <hannes@...xchg.org>
Cc: hughd@...gle.com, mhocko@...e.com, roman.gushchin@...ux.dev,
 shakeel.butt@...ux.dev, muchun.song@...ux.dev, david@...nel.org,
 lorenzo.stoakes@...cle.com, ziy@...dia.com, harry.yoo@...cle.com,
 imran.f.khan@...cle.com, kamalesh.babulal@...cle.com,
 axelrasmussen@...gle.com, yuanchu@...gle.com, weixugc@...gle.com,
 chenridong@...weicloud.com, mkoutny@...e.com, akpm@...ux-foundation.org,
 hamzamahfooz@...ux.microsoft.com, apais@...ux.microsoft.com,
 lance.yang@...ux.dev, linux-mm@...ck.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
 cgroups@...r.kernel.org, Qi Zheng <zhengqi.arch@...edance.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 24/28] mm: vmscan: prepare for reparenting traditional
 LRU folios



On 12/18/25 9:32 PM, Johannes Weiner wrote:
> On Wed, Dec 17, 2025 at 03:27:48PM +0800, Qi Zheng wrote:
>> From: Qi Zheng <zhengqi.arch@...edance.com>
>>
>> To reslove the dying memcg issue, we need to reparent LRU folios of child
> 
>       resolve

Got it.

> 
>> memcg to its parent memcg. For traditional LRU list, each lruvec of every
>> memcg comprises four LRU lists. Due to the symmetry of the LRU lists, it
>> is feasible to transfer the LRU lists from a memcg to its parent memcg
>> during the reparenting process.
>>
>> This commit implements the specific function, which will be used during
>> the reparenting process.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Qi Zheng <zhengqi.arch@...edance.com>
>> Reviewed-by: Harry Yoo <harry.yoo@...cle.com>
> 
> Overall looks sane to me. I have a few nits below, not nothing
> major. With those resolved, please feel free to add
> 
> Acked-by: Johannes Weiner <hannes@...xchg.org>

Thanks!

> 
>> @@ -2648,6 +2648,44 @@ static bool can_age_anon_pages(struct lruvec *lruvec,
>>   			  lruvec_memcg(lruvec));
>>   }
>>   
>> +#ifdef CONFIG_MEMCG
>> +static void lruvec_reparent_lru(struct lruvec *src, struct lruvec *dst,
>> +				enum lru_list lru)
>> +{
>> +	int zid;
>> +	struct mem_cgroup_per_node *mz_src, *mz_dst;
>> +
>> +	mz_src = container_of(src, struct mem_cgroup_per_node, lruvec);
>> +	mz_dst = container_of(dst, struct mem_cgroup_per_node, lruvec);
>> +
>> +	if (lru != LRU_UNEVICTABLE)
>> +		list_splice_tail_init(&src->lists[lru], &dst->lists[lru]);
>> +
>> +	for (zid = 0; zid < MAX_NR_ZONES; zid++) {
>> +		mz_dst->lru_zone_size[zid][lru] += mz_src->lru_zone_size[zid][lru];
>> +		mz_src->lru_zone_size[zid][lru] = 0;
>> +	}
>> +}
>> +
>> +void lru_reparent_memcg(struct mem_cgroup *src, struct mem_cgroup *dst)
> 
> I can see why you want to pass both src and dst for convenience, but
> it makes the API look a lot more generic than it is. It can only
> safely move LRUs from a cgroup to its parent.
> 
> As such, I'd slightly prefer only passing one pointer and doing the
> parent lookup internally. It's dealer's choice.

Make sense, will do.

> 
> However, if you'd like to keep both pointers for a centralized lookup,
> can you please rename the parameters @child and @parent, and add
> 
> 	VM_WARN_ON(parent != parent_mem_cgroup(child));
> 
> Also please add a comment explaining the expected caller locking.

OK.

> 
> Lastly, vmscan.c is the reclaim policy. Mechanical LRU shuffling like
> this is better placed in mm/swap.c.

OK, will move it to mm/swap.c.



Powered by blists - more mailing lists

Powered by Openwall GNU/*/Linux Powered by OpenVZ