> On Mar 24, 2022, at 2:52 AM, Michal Koutný <mkoutny@xxxxxxxx> wrote: > > On Wed, Mar 23, 2022 at 02:44:24PM -0700, Roman Gushchin <roman.gushchin@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: >> Does it mean that in the following configuration: >> `parent .low=50M >> ` s1 .low=0M .current=50M >> ` s2 .low=0M .current=50M >> there will be no memory.events::low at all? (assuming the recursive thing is on) > > True, no memory.events:low among siblings. > Number of memory.events:low in the parent depends on how much has to be > reclaimed (>50M means carving into parent's protection, hence it'll be > counted). Ok, so it’s not really about the implementation details of the reclaim mechanism (I mean rounding up to the batch size etc), it’s a more generic change: do not generate low events for cgroups not explicitly protected by a non-zero memory.low value. Idk, I don’t have a strong argument against this change (except that it changes the existing behavior), but I also don’t see why such events are harmful. Do you mind elaborating a bit more? Thank you!
