From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from out-180.mta1.migadu.com (out-180.mta1.migadu.com [95.215.58.180]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.subspace.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 42187213248 for ; Thu, 20 Feb 2025 17:59:20 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=95.215.58.180 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1740074362; cv=none; b=UkcCg8Dfz2eT8OyD/eKvRNN29BMsFms4SzNe9pSsetHQpQGu5TshOoVxGMvI34TqgwIV9jh8BtFKbStqecwLTYchxnMkPPRbLk2s0Eh7CB3CgKXVv/uoOTpP5e/rvd3PSMm1M1zU1ozocEXt9jPpm2y1ItuzR6tsKWlWwPYkEds= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1740074362; c=relaxed/simple; bh=1u+VHvwti+AJiffWdr01QmBQEw3p09eUPuIRc0FiWOs=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:Message-ID:References:MIME-Version: Content-Type:Content-Disposition:In-Reply-To; b=TcKdE87Rpg6Ps1YAAtFMia/Zn+9okNoKr1sveiJaOapO7/To6xBMLtieGP1w2tFaa7F8deF0rWZS06LF79X3JXZExZasf3HxeOZSUq6BOdHTpoinA7gy7P2tivMW44BUOI84IIg7YkL+tXvSkp+WV9hzaFfpzar2ZNQsInr+QRY= 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=KhPDqKQ2; arc=none smtp.client-ip=95.215.58.180 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="KhPDqKQ2" Date: Thu, 20 Feb 2025 17:59:13 +0000 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=linux.dev; s=key1; t=1740074358; h=from:from:reply-to:subject:subject:date:date:message-id:message-id: to:to:cc:cc:mime-version:mime-version:content-type:content-type: in-reply-to:in-reply-to:references:references; bh=CIE8933nkdbMTfThhnyOExCftBCOOb6dTYoTdaWqWRs=; b=KhPDqKQ2M0vLNSPCo3oYTs0ngvjwW/9RbUTIi33SYi3Zatd8jjmmFNJLvthNY0H3jXt1vl x/krK1pwGKFcS+UPd6NGQAz2wEKNVRPOTuwKzjXVjKe0PDyDLLupu+KQgR44lZg1L+ozbL OFBBUuca6iX0KPwmxKTxa5ucDQ/jPbY= X-Report-Abuse: Please report any abuse attempt to abuse@migadu.com and include these headers. From: Yosry Ahmed To: Shakeel Butt Cc: JP Kobryn , tj@kernel.org, mhocko@kernel.org, hannes@cmpxchg.org, akpm@linux-foundation.org, linux-mm@kvack.org, cgroups@vger.kernel.org, kernel-team@meta.com Subject: Re: [PATCH 00/11] cgroup: separate rstat trees Message-ID: References: <20250218031448.46951-1-inwardvessel@gmail.com> Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: cgroups@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: X-Migadu-Flow: FLOW_OUT On Thu, Feb 20, 2025 at 09:53:33AM -0800, Shakeel Butt wrote: > On Thu, Feb 20, 2025 at 05:26:04PM +0000, Yosry Ahmed wrote: > > > > Another question is, does it make sense to keep BPF flushing in the > > "self" css with base stats flushing for now? IIUC BPF flushing is not > > very popular now anyway, and doing so will remove the need to support > > flushing and updating things that are not css's. Just food for thought. > > > > Oh if this simplifies the code, I would say go for it. I think we wouldn't need cgroup_rstat_ops and some of the refactoring may not be needed. It will also reduce the memory overhead, and keep it constant regardless of using BPF which is nice.