From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mail-pd0-f174.google.com (mail-pd0-f174.google.com [209.85.192.174]) by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 101CB6B0035 for ; Tue, 23 Sep 2014 07:57:08 -0400 (EDT) Received: by mail-pd0-f174.google.com with SMTP id g10so5784984pdj.5 for ; Tue, 23 Sep 2014 04:57:07 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mx2.parallels.com (mx2.parallels.com. [199.115.105.18]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPS id tw5si20299114pac.92.2014.09.23.04.57.06 for (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128/128); Tue, 23 Sep 2014 04:57:07 -0700 (PDT) Date: Tue, 23 Sep 2014 15:56:55 +0400 From: Vladimir Davydov Subject: Re: [patch] mm: memcontrol: support transparent huge pages under pressure Message-ID: <20140923115655.GJ18526@esperanza> References: <1411132840-16025-1-git-send-email-hannes@cmpxchg.org> <20140923082927.GG18526@esperanza> <20140923114827.GB13593@cmpxchg.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20140923114827.GB13593@cmpxchg.org> Sender: owner-linux-mm@kvack.org List-ID: To: Johannes Weiner Cc: Greg Thelen , linux-mm@kvack.org, Michal Hocko , Dave Hansen , cgroups@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Tue, Sep 23, 2014 at 07:48:27AM -0400, Johannes Weiner wrote: > On Tue, Sep 23, 2014 at 12:29:27PM +0400, Vladimir Davydov wrote: > > On Mon, Sep 22, 2014 at 10:52:50PM -0700, Greg Thelen wrote: > > > In this condition, if res usage is at limit then there's no point in > > > swapping because memsw.usage is already maximal. Prior to this patch > > > I think the kernel did the right thing, but not afterwards. > > > > > > Before this patch: > > > if res.usage == res.limit, try_charge() indirectly calls > > > try_to_free_mem_cgroup_pages(noswap=true) > > > > But this is wrong. If we fail to charge res, we should try to do swap > > out along with page cache reclaim. Swap out won't affect memsw.usage, > > but will diminish res.usage so that the allocation may succeed. > > But we know that the memsw limit must be hit as well in that case, and > swapping only makes progress in the sense that we are then succeeding > the memory charge. But we still fail to charge memsw. Yeah, I admit I said nonsense. The problem Greg pointed out does exist. I think your second patch (charging memsw before res) should fix it. Thanks, Vladimir -- 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