Re: (sashiko review) [RFC PATCH 1/9] mm/damon/core: introduce failed region quota charge ratio

SeongJae Park
2026-04-04T20:46:39Z

sashiko found an issue that better to be fixed. I will fix it in the next
revision.

Forwarding sashiko review in a reply format with my inline
comments below, for details of my view and doing discussions
via mails if needed.

> # review url: https://sashiko.dev/#/patchset/20260404163943.89278-2-sj@kernel.org
> # start of sashiko.dev inline review
> commit a0c4b65226ecf5534b53ebac64430db94a861d2c
> Author: SeongJae Park <sj@kernel.org>
>
> mm/damon/core: introduce failed region quota charge ratio
>
> This commit introduces a mechanism to specify how much of a DAMOS action's
> failed memory should be charged to the quota. It adds numerator and
> denominator parameters to allow flexible charge ratio configuration.
>
> > diff --git a/include/linux/damon.h b/include/linux/damon.h
> > index f2cdb7c3f5e6c..df7b0340965f9 100644
> > --- a/include/linux/damon.h
> > +++ b/include/linux/damon.h
> [ ... ]
> > @@ -276,6 +282,9 @@ struct damos_quota {
> > enum damos_quota_goal_tuner goal_tuner;
> > unsigned long esz;
> >
> > + unsigned int fail_charge_num;
> > + unsigned int fail_charge_denom;
>
> Is there a guarantee that fail_charge_num is less than or equal to
> fail_charge_denom?
>
> If fail_charge_num is larger, the added charge will be greater than sz.
> When a region is split to exactly fit the remaining quota, could this make
> quota->charged_sz strictly greater than quota->esz?
>
> If so, would the remaining quota calculation in the next iteration underflow
> and lead to corrupting the damon_region boundaries when splitting?

No. Existing charged_sz vs esz comparison code allows charged_sz be larger
than esz, using '>=' operator. And when the next charge window starts,
quota->charged_sz is reset to zero. So I show no problem here.

>
> > +
> > unsigned int weight_sz;
> > unsigned int weight_nr_accesses;
> > unsigned int weight_age;
> > diff --git a/mm/damon/core.c b/mm/damon/core.c
> > index 3bc7a2bbfe7de..f468c0257a3ec 100644
> > --- a/mm/damon/core.c
> > +++ b/mm/damon/core.c
> [ ... ]
> > @@ -2097,7 +2099,12 @@ static void damos_apply_scheme(struct damon_ctx *c, struct damon_target *t,
> > ktime_get_coarse_ts64(&end);
> > quota->total_charged_ns += timespec64_to_ns(&end) -
> > timespec64_to_ns(&begin);
> > - quota->charged_sz += sz;
> > + if (quota->fail_charge_denom)
> > + quota->charged_sz += sz_applied +
> > + (sz - sz_applied) * quota->fail_charge_num /
> > + quota->fail_charge_denom;
>
> If memory management operations backing apply_scheme (like damon_pa_pageout)
> process whole folios, can sz_applied be strictly greater than the region's
> size sz (for example, when a 4KB region overlaps with a 2MB THP)?
>
> Does this cause the unsigned subtraction (sz - sz_applied) to underflow
> into a very large positive value, exhausting the quota prematurely?

Good point. The premature quota exhaustion should not be a critical issue, but
better to be avoided. I will fix this in the next revision.

>
> Could the multiplication (sz - sz_applied) * quota->fail_charge_num overflow
> before division?
>
> On 32-bit architectures, or with a large fail_charge_num, could this wrap
> around and result in a much smaller charge than expected, allowing the scheme
> to bypass the quota limits?

I will use mult_frac() to avoid unnecessary overflow.

>
> What happens if an action fails, and fail_charge_num is set to 0?
>
> Does quota->charged_sz remain unchanged while the region is split to fit the
> remaining quota?
>
> Since the remaining quota stays the same, could this cause the subsequent loop
> iterations to continuously split the remainder of the region into identical
> small chunks, allocating a massive number of damon_region structures?

That could happen, if that's what the user intend to. That's no problem.

>
> > + else
> > + quota->charged_sz += sz;
> > if (damos_quota_is_set(quota) &&
> > quota->charged_sz >= quota->esz) {
> > quota->charge_target_from = t;
>
>
> # end of sashiko.dev inline review
> # review url: https://sashiko.dev/#/patchset/20260404163943.89278-2-sj@kernel.org

Thanks,
SJ

# hkml [1] generated a draft of this mail. You can regenerate
# this using below command:
#
# hkml patch sashiko_dev --for_forwarding \
# 20260404163943.89278-2-sj@kernel.org
#
# [1] https://github.com/sjp38/hackermail