On Thu 15-03-18 18:01:34, Kirill Tkhai wrote:
> xfs_reclaim_inodes_count(XFS_M(sb)) does not care about memcg.
> So, it's called for memcg reclaim too, e.g. this list is shrinked
> disproportionality to another lists.
>
> This looks confusing, so I'm reporting about this.
> Consider this patch as RFC.
Could you be more specific about the problem you are trying to solve?
Because we do skip shrinkers which are not memcg aware by
shrink_slab:
/*
* If kernel memory accounting is disabled, we ignore
* SHRINKER_MEMCG_AWARE flag and call all shrinkers
* passing NULL for memcg.
*/
if (memcg_kmem_enabled() &&
!!memcg != !!(shrinker->flags & SHRINKER_MEMCG_AWARE))
continue;
Or am I missing something?
> Signed-off-by: Kirill Tkhai <ktk...@virtuozzo.com>
> ---
> fs/xfs/xfs_super.c | 2 ++
> 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+)
>
> diff --git a/fs/xfs/xfs_super.c b/fs/xfs/xfs_super.c
> index 951271f57d00..124568aefa94 100644
> --- a/fs/xfs/xfs_super.c
> +++ b/fs/xfs/xfs_super.c
> @@ -1788,6 +1788,8 @@ xfs_fs_nr_cached_objects(
> struct super_block *sb,
> struct shrink_control *sc)
> {
> + if (sc->memcg)
> + return 0;
> return xfs_reclaim_inodes_count(XFS_M(sb));
> }
>
--
Michal Hocko
SUSE Labs
