Am 07.06.24 um 16:43 schrieb Joshi, Mukul:
[AMD Official Use Only - AMD Internal Distribution Only]
-----Original Message-----
From: Koenig, Christian <Christian.Koenig@xxxxxxx>
Sent: Friday, June 7, 2024 3:26 AM
To: Joshi, Mukul <Mukul.Joshi@xxxxxxx>; amd-gfx@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Cc: Kuehling, Felix <Felix.Kuehling@xxxxxxx>; Bhardwaj, Rajneesh
<Rajneesh.Bhardwaj@xxxxxxx>; Yang, Philip <Philip.Yang@xxxxxxx>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] drm/ttm: Add cgroup memory accounting for GTT
memory
Am 06.06.24 um 21:22 schrieb Mukul Joshi:
Make sure we do not overflow the memory limits set for a cgroup when
doing GTT memory allocations.
NAK, That's intentionally not done like that.
Please see the cgroup discussion on memory management on the public
mailing list.
Can you please point us to that discussion?
IIRC search the mailing list for mails prefixed with "drm/cgroup:".
At some point I stopped looking into this mail thread, but the idea of
using __GFP_ACCOUNT was abandoned rather early in the thread.
For adding it in the TTM pool the whole idea falls apart when you
consider that the process calling this is usually not the process
actually using the memory.
For example when a process causes VRAM pressure it allocates memory to
swap out the BOs from other processes to system memory.
Regards,
Christian.
Thanks,
Mukul
Regards,
Christian.
Suggested-by: Philip Yang <philip.yang@xxxxxxx>
Signed-off-by: Mukul Joshi <mukul.joshi@xxxxxxx>
---
drivers/gpu/drm/ttm/ttm_pool.c | 2 +-
1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/ttm/ttm_pool.c
b/drivers/gpu/drm/ttm/ttm_pool.c index 6e1fd6985ffc..59e1accdef08
100644
--- a/drivers/gpu/drm/ttm/ttm_pool.c
+++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/ttm/ttm_pool.c
@@ -91,7 +91,7 @@ static struct page *ttm_pool_alloc_page(struct
ttm_pool *pool, gfp_t gfp_flags,
*/
if (order)
gfp_flags |= __GFP_NOMEMALLOC | __GFP_NORETRY |
__GFP_NOWARN |
- __GFP_KSWAPD_RECLAIM;
+ __GFP_KSWAPD_RECLAIM | __GFP_ACCOUNT;
if (!pool->use_dma_alloc) {
p = alloc_pages_node(pool->nid, gfp_flags, order);
