On Wed 17-02-21 12:41:34, Tim Chen wrote:
> During soft limit memory reclaim, we will temporarily remove the target
> mem cgroup from the cgroup soft limit tree. We then perform memory
> reclaim, update the memory usage excess count and re-insert the mem
> cgroup back into the mem cgroup soft limit tree according to the new
> memory usage excess count.
>
> However, when memory reclaim failed for a maximum number of attempts
> and we bail out of the reclaim loop, we forgot to put the target mem
> cgroup chosen for next reclaim back to the soft limit tree. This prevented
> pages in the mem cgroup from being reclaimed in the future even though
> the mem cgroup exceeded its soft limit. Fix the logic and put the mem
> cgroup back on the tree when page reclaim failed for the mem cgroup.
>
> Reviewed-by: Ying Huang <ying.hu...@intel.com>
> Signed-off-by: Tim Chen <tim.c.c...@linux.intel.com>
I have already acked this patch in the previous version along with Fixes
tag. It seems that my review feedback has been completely ignored also
for other patches in this series.
> ---
> mm/memcontrol.c | 6 +++++-
> 1 file changed, 5 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
>
> diff --git a/mm/memcontrol.c b/mm/memcontrol.c
> index ed5cc78a8dbf..a51bf90732cb 100644
> --- a/mm/memcontrol.c
> +++ b/mm/memcontrol.c
> @@ -3505,8 +3505,12 @@ unsigned long mem_cgroup_soft_limit_reclaim(pg_data_t
> *pgdat, int order,
> loop > MEM_CGROUP_MAX_SOFT_LIMIT_RECLAIM_LOOPS))
> break;
> } while (!nr_reclaimed);
> - if (next_mz)
> + if (next_mz) {
> + spin_lock_irq(&mctz->lock);
> + __mem_cgroup_insert_exceeded(next_mz, mctz, excess);
> + spin_unlock_irq(&mctz->lock);
> css_put(&next_mz->memcg->css);
> + }
> return nr_reclaimed;
> }
>
> --
> 2.20.1
--
Michal Hocko
SUSE Labs
