From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from mta1.migadu.com (out-217.mta1.migadu.com [95.215.58.217]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.subspace.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 1EFB04F648D for ; Thu, 3 Sep 2026 17:18:36 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=95.215.58.217 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1788455920; cv=none; b=WwHL/Pw/tKvOQbUnsrwEGd/V5G/sz2rzlDPUz7kUhVpqHWo5d7Q+CGfmjVmWrNL1CvACs/bjSaOKuE1czhmT9SwsLe90hX5uXdTN+q91vtQIzsNgepD3F4XPh67VFjuDQLNl/rN63KQ0kx30RA7mTSvHva1BULfIasDZh9mFejs= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1788455920; c=relaxed/simple; bh=48a3toOvR18Ra0dPY+h4+qV+F4oz76ihqdhRFA6Wyq8=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:Message-ID:References:MIME-Version: Content-Type:Content-Disposition:In-Reply-To; b=TtuB0OQModdAeqSgmJQDPbY22Vm2luD6zmVvLw4nTUpGGn+bqwhULVnKPoNV/MDg7LF/YAVk7U3HMDvyucuyUi0oVXcjby15QVzU4MUQNFlgFaXgABXFSxoPFBTtuRj+4A7asnu+M5ekqK8oN3SVt15bhw0wr34arETTCFvWDTE= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=linux.dev; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=linux.dev; dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=linux.dev header.i=@linux.dev header.b=xszAiWsp; arc=none smtp.client-ip=95.215.58.217 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=linux.dev Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=linux.dev Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=linux.dev header.i=@linux.dev header.b="xszAiWsp" X-Envelope-To: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org DKIM-Signature: a=rsa-sha256; bh=48a3toOvR18Ra0dPY+h4+qV+F4oz76ihqdhRFA6Wyq8=; c=simple/simple; d=linux.dev; h=from:to:subject:date:message-id:mime-version:content-type; s=key1; t=1788455914; v=1; x=1789060714; b=xszAiWspvhN3djEez38IGbJV6LtzxRUcRaNOVY8Vqb+LFZjFX3exHgVy5GCrBuOjmorOiVl9 vAXsluFhtsov9PvC2+nio3Se18K/hAdUsneQF4q3Ca6YRUI/JPXXXpF8hILcBt/eumG3xkAUVNj KyCkzDWSFNTuYy/swN+KfrwA= X-Envelope-To: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Received: by smtp.migadu.com with ESMTPS id fd62f8eb6babc664; Thu, 03 Sep 2026 17:18:24 +0000 X-Mizu-Trace-ID: fd62f8eb6babc664 X-Migadu-Flow: FLOW_OUT Date: Thu, 3 Sep 2026 10:18:23 -0700 From: Shakeel Butt To: Mathieu Desnoyers Cc: Andrew Morton , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, "Paul E. McKenney" , Steven Rostedt , Masami Hiramatsu , Dennis Zhou , Tejun Heo , Christoph Lameter , Martin Liu , David Rientjes , christian.koenig@amd.com, SeongJae Park , Michal Hocko , Johannes Weiner , Sweet Tea Dorminy , Lorenzo Stoakes , "Liam R . Howlett" , Mike Rapoport , Suren Baghdasaryan , Vlastimil Babka , Christian Brauner , Wei Yang , David Hildenbrand , Miaohe Lin , Al Viro , Yu Zhao , Roman Gushchin , Mateusz Guzik , Matthew Wilcox , Baolin Wang , Aboorva Devarajan , David Carlier , Josh Law , linux-mm@kvack.org Subject: Re: [PATCH v21 0/6] Hierarchical Percpu Counters for RSS Message-ID: References: <20260901182857.26690-1-mathieu.desnoyers@efficios.com> Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20260901182857.26690-1-mathieu.desnoyers@efficios.com> On Tue, Sep 01, 2026 at 02:28:45PM -0400, Mathieu Desnoyers wrote: > Hi Andrew, > > Here is the hierarchical percpu counters for RSS accounting series > rebased on top of v7.3-rc1. It includes small bootup fixes which were > needed to fix bootup sequence on specific architectures, and a rename of > the test config option to include "KUNIT_". > > This aims at replacing the prior version of the series you had > in mm. > > As a reminder, the goal here is to provide more precise RSS counters > through /proc. A future step would be to also use these counters to > speed up the OOM killer task selection when OOM is triggered by > memcg. In whole-machine OOM situations, latency introduced by the > OOM killer task selection may not be too much of an issue, but for > memcg, where cgroups may routinely depend on the OOM killer, the > acceptable latency tradeoff is quite different. > Hi Mathieu, can you please comment on the Sashiko's findings [1]? Worth addressing or not? [1] https://sashiko.dev/#/patchset/20260901182857.26690-1-mathieu.desnoyers%40efficios.com