From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: CGEL Subject: Re: [PATCH] mm/memcg: support control THP behaviour in cgroup Date: Wed, 11 May 2022 03:31:00 +0000 Message-ID: <627b2df5.1c69fb81.4a22.160f@mx.google.com> References: <6275d3e7.1c69fb81.1d62.4504@mx.google.com> <6278fa75.1c69fb81.9c598.f794@mx.google.com> <6279c354.1c69fb81.7f6c1.15e0@mx.google.com> <627b1d39.1c69fb81.fe952.6426@mx.google.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Return-path: DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20210112; h=message-id:date:from:to:cc:subject:references:mime-version :content-disposition:in-reply-to; bh=f3y8JeeuRKLfinU+E+7GukwHp8s5bConUpcRwZiK5/Y=; b=BKbENFHQMubnhde7tbStDgYqbvdUGHDGa3+vDByOTiOk/cx4ITbwSWFkiUnYPiOv3T m/6+vUBywcMUXD73hoF8tjZVxt/Cwrm7I/1Adn8e/mobzys25xFLr0E5RWtPk2HuprZc /Qqxa5EHnsPlq8/oBzZh8cq1Kp/z82xrVJHa/6sfoD15YJe+oIh3NFv4OI8NZgLvHOUQ 5FdE6CSuZdylu/Nt90wYkNqL0Cu28p+s/fADnxBfxxR6Pf0FeDb8TiqIcw95VgLQUn01 ROjN0OtWv3ORaq8G8SJG44rVQLb4tS6a5/nNQawPHTg2VOxI/KHK9dSaWWQBnDGUZnHL m8Eg== Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: List-ID: Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit To: Roman Gushchin Cc: Shakeel Butt , Yang Shi , Michal Hocko , Andrew Morton , Johannes Weiner , Matthew Wilcox , Miaohe Lin , William Kucharski , Peter Xu , Hugh Dickins , Vlastimil Babka , Muchun Song , Suren Baghdasaryan , Linux Kernel Mailing List , Linux MM , Cgroups , Yang Yang On Tue, May 10, 2022 at 08:11:16PM -0700, Roman Gushchin wrote: > On Tue, May 10, 2022 at 07:47:29PM -0700, Shakeel Butt wrote: > > On Tue, May 10, 2022 at 7:19 PM CGEL wrote: > > > > > [...] > > > > > > > > > > > > All controls in cgroup v2 should be hierarchical. This is really > > > > > > required for a proper delegation semantic. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Could we align to the semantic of /sys/fs/cgroup/memory.swappiness? > > > > > Some distributions like Ubuntu is still using cgroup v1. > > > > > > > > Other than enable flag, how would you handle the defrag flag > > > > hierarchically? It is much more complicated. > > > > > > Refer to memory.swappiness for cgroup, this new interface better be independent. > > > > Let me give my 0.02. I buy the use-case of Admin restricting THPs to > > low priority jobs but I don't think memory controller is the right > > place to enforce that policy. Michal gave one way (prctl()) to enforce > > that policy. Have you explored the BPF way to enforce this policy? > > +1 for bpf > > I think these THP hints are too implementation-dependent and unstable to become > a part of cgroup API. > Thanks! If no other suggesting we will submit a bpf version of this patch. > Thanks!