Re: [PATCH] mm: memcontrol: use per-cpu stocks for socket memory uncharging

Roman Gushchin
2017-08-30T12:57:29Z

On Wed, Aug 30, 2017 at 02:55:43PM +0200, Michal Hocko wrote:
> On Wed 30-08-17 13:44:59, Roman Gushchin wrote:
> > On Wed, Aug 30, 2017 at 02:36:55PM +0200, Michal Hocko wrote:
> > > On Tue 29-08-17 11:01:50, Roman Gushchin wrote:
> > > [...]
> > > > diff --git a/mm/memcontrol.c b/mm/memcontrol.c
> > > > index b9cf3cf4a3d0..a69d23082abf 100644
> > > > --- a/mm/memcontrol.c
> > > > +++ b/mm/memcontrol.c
> > > > @@ -1792,6 +1792,9 @@ static void refill_stock(struct mem_cgroup *memcg, unsigned int nr_pages)
> > > > }
> > > > stock->nr_pages += nr_pages;
> > > >
> > > > + if (stock->nr_pages > CHARGE_BATCH)
> > > > + drain_stock(stock);
> > > > +
> > > > local_irq_restore(flags);
> > > > }
> > >
> > > Why do we need this? In other words, why cannot we rely on draining we
> > > already do?
> >
> > The existing draining depends on memory pressure, so to keep
> > the accounting (which we expose to a user) reasonable accurate
> > even without memory pressure, we need to limit the size of per-cpu stocks.
>
> Why don't we need this for regular page charges? Or maybe we do but that
> sounds like a seprate and an unrealted fix to me.

Because we never refill more than CHARGE_BATCH.

--
To unsubscribe, send a message with 'unsubscribe linux-mm' in
the body to majordomo@kvack.org. For more info on Linux MM,
see: http://www.linux-mm.org/ .
Don't email: email@kvack.org