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 Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [23.128.96.18]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id ABA36C433FE for ; Tue, 11 Oct 2022 19:02:14 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S230150AbiJKTCL (ORCPT ); Tue, 11 Oct 2022 15:02:11 -0400 Received: from lindbergh.monkeyblade.net ([23.128.96.19]:55396 "EHLO lindbergh.monkeyblade.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S230081AbiJKTB2 (ORCPT ); Tue, 11 Oct 2022 15:01:28 -0400 Received: from smtp-out2.suse.de (smtp-out2.suse.de [195.135.220.29]) by lindbergh.monkeyblade.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 447DE8A1DE; Tue, 11 Oct 2022 12:01:23 -0700 (PDT) Received: from imap2.suse-dmz.suse.de (imap2.suse-dmz.suse.de [192.168.254.74]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature ECDSA (P-521) server-digest SHA512) (No client certificate requested) by smtp-out2.suse.de (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 828581F37C; Tue, 11 Oct 2022 19:01:21 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=suse.com; s=susede1; t=1665514881; h=from:from:reply-to: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=w1Wip/kR/nLx7NLOcIVQ++U0LbZfFaHpu0ZiHUekL6M=; b=r0pi3DBSDiAet5rHRn6FCp5z5UxtoxqnvqLG4J56c9yiBSUM+770wvzqJwNB5kNiRUa1IZ shbQchCLgt2qSnnrrkvPeyFYQoKrHIwkovCmtVRT2LFUY6Zyvf0AC2axO2N9Sf/+3Dimv2 LBdTVAi9D5F06aQWnvV/8tU8HTcuo6M= Received: from imap2.suse-dmz.suse.de (imap2.suse-dmz.suse.de [192.168.254.74]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature ECDSA (P-521) server-digest SHA512) (No client certificate requested) by imap2.suse-dmz.suse.de (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 5220E139ED; Tue, 11 Oct 2022 19:01:21 +0000 (UTC) Received: from dovecot-director2.suse.de ([192.168.254.65]) by imap2.suse-dmz.suse.de with ESMTPSA id 9NrHEYG9RWN2PwAAMHmgww (envelope-from ); Tue, 11 Oct 2022 19:01:21 +0000 Date: Tue, 11 Oct 2022 21:01:20 +0200 From: Michal Hocko To: Tejun Heo Cc: Waiman Long , Johannes Weiner , Roman Gushchin , Shakeel Butt , Muchun Song , Andrew Morton , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, cgroups@vger.kernel.org, linux-mm@kvack.org, Chris Down Subject: Re: [PATCH] mm/memcontrol: Don't increase effective low/min if no protection needed Message-ID: References: <20221011143015.1152968-1-longman@redhat.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Tue 11-10-22 07:04:32, Tejun Heo wrote: > On Tue, Oct 11, 2022 at 01:00:22PM -0400, Waiman Long wrote: > > You are right about that. An alternative way to address this issue is to > > disable memory low event when memory.low isn't set. An user who want to > > track memory.low event has to set it to a non-zero value. Would that be > > acceptable? > > Wouldn't it make sense to fix the test? With recursive_prot on, the cgroup > actually is under low protection and it seems like the correct behavior is > to report the low events accordingly. Agreed, the semantic makes sense and it seems to be just the test that is not aware of it. -- Michal Hocko SUSE Labs