From: Shakeel Butt <shakeel.butt@linux.dev>
To: Johannes Weiner <hannes@cmpxchg.org>
Cc: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
David Hildenbrand <david@kernel.org>,
Yosry Ahmed <yosry.ahmed@linux.dev>, Zi Yan <ziy@nvidia.com>,
"Liam R. Howlett" <Liam.Howlett@oracle.com>,
Usama Arif <usama.arif@linux.dev>,
Kiryl Shutsemau <kas@kernel.org>,
Dave Chinner <david@fromorbit.com>,
Roman Gushchin <roman.gushchin@linux.dev>,
linux-mm@kvack.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 1/7] mm: list_lru: lock_list_lru_of_memcg() cannot return NULL if !skip_empty
Date: Wed, 18 Mar 2026 12:34:28 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <abr9sDFvueL6fGPv@linux.dev> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <abr8Kf38paSBh9H_@cmpxchg.org>
On Wed, Mar 18, 2026 at 03:25:29PM -0400, Johannes Weiner wrote:
> On Wed, Mar 18, 2026 at 10:56:55AM -0700, Shakeel Butt wrote:
> > On Thu, Mar 12, 2026 at 04:51:49PM -0400, Johannes Weiner wrote:
> > > skip_empty is only for the shrinker to abort and skip a list that's
> > > empty or whose cgroup is being deleted.
> > >
> > > For list additions and deletions, the cgroup hierarchy is walked
> > > upwards until a valid list_lru head is found, or it will fall back to
> > > the node list. Acquiring the lock won't fail. Remove the NULL checks
> > > in those callers.
> > >
> > > Signed-off-by: Johannes Weiner <hannes@cmpxchg.org>
> > > ---
> >
> > What do you think about squashing the following into this patch?
> >
> > From bd56ea4505f792e00079b1a8dd98cb6f7a5e7215 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
> > From: Shakeel Butt <shakeel.butt@linux.dev>
> > Date: Wed, 18 Mar 2026 10:43:53 -0700
> > Subject: [PATCH] list_lru: cleanup
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Shakeel Butt <shakeel.butt@linux.dev>
>
> Thanks for taking a look!
>
> There is some overlap and conflict between your delta and what later
> patches in the series do.
>
> AFAICS, the main thing left over would be: to have
> __lock_list_lru_of_memcg() for the reclaimer (which does not walk the
> parents during a cgroup deletion race) and lock_list_lru_of_memcg()
> which does. Thereby eliminating the @skip_empty bool.
Yeah, I saw your discussion with David and thought on how can we further reduce
the params.
> The downside
> would be to have another level in the lock function stack which is
> duplicated for CONFIG_MEMCG and !CONFIG_MEMCG, and the !CONFIG_MEMCG
> versions are identical.
>
> I'm not sure that's worth it?
I am fine with whatever route you take. I know you have next version ready to
send, I will review the remaining patches for the next version (though I have
taken a look on the current series but will add my tags for the next one :P).
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2026-03-18 19:34 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 30+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2026-03-12 20:51 [PATCH v2 0/7] mm: switch THP shrinker to list_lru Johannes Weiner
2026-03-12 20:51 ` [PATCH v2 1/7] mm: list_lru: lock_list_lru_of_memcg() cannot return NULL if !skip_empty Johannes Weiner
2026-03-17 9:43 ` David Hildenbrand (Arm)
2026-03-18 17:56 ` Shakeel Butt
2026-03-18 19:25 ` Johannes Weiner
2026-03-18 19:34 ` Shakeel Butt [this message]
2026-03-12 20:51 ` [PATCH v2 2/7] mm: list_lru: deduplicate unlock_list_lru() Johannes Weiner
2026-03-17 9:44 ` David Hildenbrand (Arm)
2026-03-18 17:57 ` Shakeel Butt
2026-03-12 20:51 ` [PATCH v2 3/7] mm: list_lru: move list dead check to lock_list_lru_of_memcg() Johannes Weiner
2026-03-17 9:47 ` David Hildenbrand (Arm)
2026-03-12 20:51 ` [PATCH v2 4/7] mm: list_lru: deduplicate lock_list_lru() Johannes Weiner
2026-03-17 9:51 ` David Hildenbrand (Arm)
2026-03-12 20:51 ` [PATCH v2 5/7] mm: list_lru: introduce caller locking for additions and deletions Johannes Weiner
2026-03-17 10:00 ` David Hildenbrand (Arm)
2026-03-17 14:03 ` Johannes Weiner
2026-03-17 14:34 ` Johannes Weiner
2026-03-17 16:35 ` David Hildenbrand (Arm)
2026-03-12 20:51 ` [PATCH v2 6/7] mm: list_lru: introduce memcg_list_lru_alloc_folio() Johannes Weiner
2026-03-17 10:09 ` David Hildenbrand (Arm)
2026-03-12 20:51 ` [PATCH v2 7/7] mm: switch deferred split shrinker to list_lru Johannes Weiner
2026-03-18 20:25 ` David Hildenbrand (Arm)
2026-03-18 22:48 ` Johannes Weiner
2026-03-19 7:21 ` David Hildenbrand (Arm)
2026-03-20 16:02 ` Johannes Weiner
2026-03-23 19:39 ` David Hildenbrand (Arm)
2026-03-20 16:07 ` Johannes Weiner
2026-03-23 19:32 ` David Hildenbrand (Arm)
2026-03-13 17:39 ` [syzbot ci] Re: mm: switch THP " syzbot ci
2026-03-13 23:08 ` Johannes Weiner
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=abr9sDFvueL6fGPv@linux.dev \
--to=shakeel.butt@linux.dev \
--cc=Liam.Howlett@oracle.com \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=david@fromorbit.com \
--cc=david@kernel.org \
--cc=hannes@cmpxchg.org \
--cc=kas@kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
--cc=roman.gushchin@linux.dev \
--cc=usama.arif@linux.dev \
--cc=yosry.ahmed@linux.dev \
--cc=ziy@nvidia.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox