From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from mta1.migadu.com (out-6.mta1.migadu.com [95.215.58.6]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.subspace.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 8922F4ACC98 for ; Wed, 2 Sep 2026 17:43:34 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=95.215.58.6 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1788371016; cv=none; b=fk4iWPbiiu7GpQJSgdjyFpLwPnDYkXt8moZdpPmVOHx2Q008hTE0ttuazIvIGEJw2hUAulDiKP61/vpO8bZgl0Do1qL7R+gpYK92kXOs20c/kxCQvcY0m2FH/0ZrcxPGGn6nXj5VDmvqW0X0h9+yag1zYkNlsO3ntnIAkdRDIhg= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1788371016; c=relaxed/simple; bh=dbMEz1JHYuKrPhG1IXsUKT9HXwJuTLvgviFN/ZwRb6U=; h=From:To:Cc:Subject:Date:Message-ID:MIME-Version; b=PfYxIv//7ko02/Dro24Z86iQBvvArOGwl4XhJHNLTTNh0yI0ere9jbaZzgOh1SFs0ZJTvMErTOPgMeqhWaNBjt4TG8OTiY932rZusbHNkGKYMwKWHnZxoA/pnLZCZYrbT9JbfNCSn2XMtGbhryhQzgXc6p1ZBb1HPnaxgytUezg= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=linux.dev; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=linux.dev; dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=linux.dev header.i=@linux.dev header.b=qGWHhZGb; arc=none smtp.client-ip=95.215.58.6 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=linux.dev Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=linux.dev Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=linux.dev header.i=@linux.dev header.b="qGWHhZGb" X-Envelope-To: cgroups@vger.kernel.org DKIM-Signature: a=rsa-sha256; bh=dbMEz1JHYuKrPhG1IXsUKT9HXwJuTLvgviFN/ZwRb6U=; c=simple/simple; d=linux.dev; h=from:to:subject:date:message-id:mime-version:content-type; s=key1; t=1788371012; v=1; x=1788975812; b=qGWHhZGbo2LzF3DO9kknlbs2X7qXCisREyuW9CQd7bP8d3CaOC4JILczONwcc8cfmEUdOubm lU5cKr90f5wQMLnBnpPnFPe8oFECbh1PO0qMWgpIMAmhBC/VwDGXD30J/XGwYaxEwaMlwkABzTN sPNY0OCSpEuAXfEMY+LgfGfc= X-Envelope-To: cgroups@vger.kernel.org Received: by smtp.migadu.com with ESMTPS id 65786b149d393ad8; Wed, 02 Sep 2026 17:43:22 +0000 X-Mizu-Trace-ID: 65786b149d393ad8 X-Migadu-Flow: FLOW_OUT From: Shakeel Butt To: Andrew Morton Cc: Michal Hocko , Johannes Weiner , Roman Gushchin , Muchun Song , David Hildenbrand , Lorenzo Stoakes , Kairui Song , Qi Zheng , Barry Song , Axel Rasmussen , tjmercier@google.com, Meta kernel team , linux-mm@kvack.org, cgroups@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: [PATCH v2 0/8] memcg: remove the v1 soft limit Date: Wed, 2 Sep 2026 10:43:03 -0700 Message-ID: <20260902174311.1772372-1-shakeel.butt@linux.dev> X-Mailer: git-send-email 2.53.0 Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: cgroups@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit The v1 soft limit was deprecated in v6.12 by commit 569c4f62d84a ("memcg: initiate deprecation of v1 soft limit") and nobody has reported depending on it in the ~21 months since. memory.low and memory.min in v2 have covered the same ground for far longer. The knob has since been made inert by "memcg: make the v1 soft limit knob inert", already queued in mm-hotfixes as a backportable fix for a syzbot report [1]. Nothing can enter the soft limit rbtree anymore, so this series just deletes the machinery that is now dead: the reclaim pass in kswapd and direct reclaim, mem_cgroup_shrink_node() and its tracepoints, the per-node rbtree, lru_gen_soft_reclaim() and the MEMCG_LRU_HEAD op, the per-node tree fields, mem_cgroup->soft_limit, and finally the v1 event ratelimiting which is now down to a single target. memory.soft_limit_in_bytes itself is untouched: writes stay ignored and reads keep returning the maximum value. Changes since v1 [2]: - Dropped "memcg: make the v1 soft limit knob inert" (1/9 in v1), which is already queued in mm-hotfixes, making this an 8-patch series. - Collected the acks and review tags. No code changes. Sashiko's v1 review [3] asked whether the softlimit tracepoints, lru_gen_soft_reclaim(), the per-node tree fields and the MEM_CGROUP_TARGET_SOFTLIMIT ratelimiting could go too. They all can and they all do, in patches 3/8, 5/8, 6/8 and 8/8 of this same series. [1] https://lore.kernel.org/all/6a7a6929.b50370da.49fe0.005e.GAE@google.com/ [2] https://lore.kernel.org/all/20260811203203.3456029-1-shakeel.butt@linux.dev/ [3] https://sashiko.dev/#/patchset/20260811203203.3456029-1-shakeel.butt@linux.dev Shakeel Butt (8): memcg: remove v1 soft limit reclaim memcg: remove mem_cgroup_shrink_node() memcg: remove the soft limit reclaim tracepoints memcg: remove the soft limit rbtree memcg: remove lru_gen_soft_reclaim() memcg: remove the per-node soft limit tree fields memcg: remove mem_cgroup->soft_limit memcg: simplify v1 event ratelimiting include/linux/memcontrol.h | 27 --- include/linux/mmzone.h | 30 +-- include/trace/events/vmscan.h | 14 -- mm/internal.h | 4 - mm/memcontrol-v1.c | 392 ++-------------------------------- mm/memcontrol-v1.h | 12 +- mm/memcontrol.c | 7 +- mm/vmscan.c | 96 +-------- 8 files changed, 34 insertions(+), 548 deletions(-) -- 2.53.0-Meta