From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.4 required=3.0 tests=DKIM_SIGNED,DKIM_VALID, DKIM_VALID_AU,HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SPF_HELO_NONE, SPF_PASS,USER_AGENT_MUTT autolearn=unavailable autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id CE64DC31E50 for ; Sat, 15 Jun 2019 15:58:43 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [209.132.180.67]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id A52BD21473 for ; Sat, 15 Jun 2019 15:58:43 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=chrisdown.name header.i=@chrisdown.name header.b="XkyL4uWd" Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1726975AbfFOP6f (ORCPT ); Sat, 15 Jun 2019 11:58:35 -0400 Received: from mail-pl1-f193.google.com ([209.85.214.193]:43410 "EHLO mail-pl1-f193.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1726405AbfFOP6f (ORCPT ); Sat, 15 Jun 2019 11:58:35 -0400 Received: by mail-pl1-f193.google.com with SMTP id cl9so2275924plb.10 for ; Sat, 15 Jun 2019 08:58:35 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=chrisdown.name; s=google; h=date:from:to:cc:subject:message-id:references:mime-version :content-disposition:in-reply-to:user-agent; bh=3UEdf7L10rlDvutzhQ5oN7IH73FXQkj8yTdma29U82E=; b=XkyL4uWd3z3bLemMqav9h6r4cxQjATGvT6nrLhY1yRSxw+QOo7/ixS91nRkv7T5pHZ ygciPYZ3p4au9mHIUYBFJFcheawDvU2ZfcbDSLexM7mBnSbvzcbm957GXSGPBODlinPN VzLZVxx8U7/Rur2+zKhPoPSglFf29mPLk5sdI= X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:date:from:to:cc:subject:message-id:references :mime-version:content-disposition:in-reply-to:user-agent; bh=3UEdf7L10rlDvutzhQ5oN7IH73FXQkj8yTdma29U82E=; b=ZK7E16KUoGkRQgDc08v0kMISDtbuOHbcdDoQeo0ZhqP18O5JrZF01jFDkGKiRq0uJV Yc/afweKohjf++5O/+nE/v5Rndu4e8s/JNcWM/lX/YR9fZzo9a6XmWGD622XX1j5rU57 76pdfdsP4M9wXxOICK6QLW8JMoTUCGM3dlgsHnzg1PMJiVHc1eGfbSUXoK6dpH+kPJ2p of6ScKJIMxsuPTgfReSj3umKlgS+9aqMAZzPSnSgPnYv9oMCSFytzzMYrMsmUQavsHY2 ulshVZscoCqB7YuFWTEpsntFbc4+mUQyc82wk5siPiVnqpdtOx09JDRcfVts4fIOfKl2 ZeCw== X-Gm-Message-State: APjAAAUBzTHeQJHYAKD/gorHjOrI12/zVvg9olKcY+g8SRr3ZEJmb/Ir 3t4X4VWkYa0g8TYGl/Y+2VCVdw== X-Google-Smtp-Source: APXvYqwfY314uRro4dsc54oOetfpJqc+ffBY+G0B6BoAGGAlJaMAITXdd1MDQTxvCLR47/tBL2uq+g== X-Received: by 2002:a17:902:724:: with SMTP id 33mr96737215pli.49.1560614314543; Sat, 15 Jun 2019 08:58:34 -0700 (PDT) Received: from localhost ([61.6.140.222]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id p7sm14713756pfp.131.2019.06.15.08.58.33 (version=TLS1_3 cipher=AEAD-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256/256); Sat, 15 Jun 2019 08:58:33 -0700 (PDT) Date: Sat, 15 Jun 2019 23:58:31 +0800 From: Chris Down To: Xunlei Pang Cc: Roman Gushchin , Michal Hocko , Johannes Weiner , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-mm@kvack.org Subject: Re: [PATCH] psi: Don't account force reclaim as memory pressure Message-ID: <20190615155831.GA1307@chrisdown.name> References: <20190615120644.26743-1-xlpang@linux.alibaba.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20190615120644.26743-1-xlpang@linux.alibaba.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.12.0 (2019-05-25) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Hi Xunlei, Xunlei Pang writes: >There're several cases like resize and force_empty that don't >need to account to psi, otherwise is misleading. I'm afraid I'm quite confused by this patch. Why do you think accounting for force reclaim in PSI is misleading? I completely expect that force reclaim should still be accounted for as memory pressure, can you present some reason why it shouldn't be?