From: Guopeng Zhang <guopeng.zhang@linux.dev>
To: Tao Cui <cui.tao@linux.dev>, Johannes Weiner <hannes@cmpxchg.org>,
Michal Hocko <mhocko@kernel.org>,
Roman Gushchin <roman.gushchin@linux.dev>,
Shakeel Butt <shakeel.butt@linux.dev>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>
Cc: Muchun Song <muchun.song@linux.dev>,
cgroups@vger.kernel.org, linux-mm@kvack.org,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
Guopeng Zhang <zhangguopeng@kylinos.cn>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] mm: memcg: stop reclaim when a limit update is superseded
Date: Fri, 24 Jul 2026 14:53:29 +0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <cf2df458-2b0e-46bd-9eea-f3c15265d90e@linux.dev> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <da7f525e-077c-4fc2-99bf-04685b1d8225@linux.dev>
在 2026/7/24 11:32, Tao Cui 写道:
>
>
> 在 2026/7/24 10:18, Guopeng Zhang 写道:
>> From: Guopeng Zhang <zhangguopeng@kylinos.cn>
>>
>> kernfs serializes file operations only per open file, so separate open
>> files can update the same memory.high or memory.max file concurrently.
>> Both handlers store the new limit before synchronous reclaim, but
>> continue to use the writer's local target in the reclaim loop. If another
>> writer raises or removes the limit, the first writer can continue
>> reclaiming toward a stale target.
>>
>> For memory.max, this can leave the writer looping indefinitely once
>> reclaim retries are exhausted. The OOM path sees sufficient margin under
>> the current limit and returns true without killing, while the writer
>> still compares usage against its stale target and records another OOM
>> event.
>>
>> Check the current limit at the start of each reclaim iteration and stop
>> if it no longer matches the writer's target.
>>
>
> Fix looks correct to me.
>
> Acked-by: Tao Cui <cuitao@kylinos.cn>
>
> Nit: the message lumps both paths together, but only memory.max loops
> indefinitely. memory.high has no OOM path, so it just spins
> MAX_RECLAIM_RETRIES times and breaks on its own. Worth a line to avoid
> conflating the severity.
>
Hi,
Thanks for the review and Ack.
The message separates the two cases: the first paragraph describes the
stale-target reclaim behavior common to both, while the "For memory.max"
paragraph describes the OOM-based indefinite loop.
One detail is that memory.high is not limited to MAX_RECLAIM_RETRIES
iterations. The retry counter is decremented only when reclaim makes no
progress:
if (!reclaimed && !nr_retries--)
break;
If reclaim continues to make progress while pages are refaulted,
nr_retries is not decremented and the loop can still fail to converge.
Thanks,
Guopeng
>> Fixes: 8c8c383c04f6 ("mm: memcontrol: try harder to set a new memory.high")
>> Fixes: b6e6edcfa405 ("mm: memcontrol: reclaim and OOM kill when shrinking memory.max below usage")
>> Signed-off-by: Guopeng Zhang <zhangguopeng@kylinos.cn>
>> ---
>> Reproducer:
>>
>> Populate a cgroup with anonymous memory and disable swapping. Lower
>> memory.max from one open file, then restore it to "max" through another
>> open file after the new limit becomes visible.
>>
>> Without the patch, the first writer remains blocked and repeatedly
>> increments the OOM event counter. With the patch, it returns normally.
>>
>> mm/memcontrol.c | 6 ++++++
>> 1 file changed, 6 insertions(+)
>>
>> diff --git a/mm/memcontrol.c b/mm/memcontrol.c
>> index 8319ad8c5c23..638bdc766616 100644
>> --- a/mm/memcontrol.c
>> +++ b/mm/memcontrol.c
>> @@ -4798,6 +4798,9 @@ static ssize_t memory_high_write(struct kernfs_open_file *of,
>> unsigned long nr_pages = page_counter_read(&memcg->memory);
>> unsigned long reclaimed;
>>
>> + if (high != READ_ONCE(memcg->memory.high))
>> + break;
>> +
>> if (nr_pages <= high)
>> break;
>>
>> @@ -4853,6 +4856,9 @@ static ssize_t memory_max_write(struct kernfs_open_file *of,
>> for (;;) {
>> unsigned long nr_pages = page_counter_read(&memcg->memory);
>>
>> + if (max != READ_ONCE(memcg->memory.max))
>> + break;
>> +
>> if (nr_pages <= max)
>> break;
>>
>
prev parent reply other threads:[~2026-07-24 6:53 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 3+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2026-07-24 2:18 [PATCH] mm: memcg: stop reclaim when a limit update is superseded Guopeng Zhang
2026-07-24 3:32 ` Tao Cui
2026-07-24 6:53 ` Guopeng Zhang [this message]
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=cf2df458-2b0e-46bd-9eea-f3c15265d90e@linux.dev \
--to=guopeng.zhang@linux.dev \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=cgroups@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=cui.tao@linux.dev \
--cc=hannes@cmpxchg.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
--cc=mhocko@kernel.org \
--cc=muchun.song@linux.dev \
--cc=roman.gushchin@linux.dev \
--cc=shakeel.butt@linux.dev \
--cc=zhangguopeng@kylinos.cn \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.