On Mon, Apr 05, 2021 at 11:38:44AM -0700, Roman Gushchin wrote:
> > > @@ -534,7 +521,17 @@ static void memcg_drain_list_lru_node(struct list_lru *lru, int nid,
> > > spin_lock_irq(&nlru->lock);
> > >
> > > src = list_lru_from_memcg_idx(nlru, src_idx);
> > > + if (!src)
> > > + goto out;
> > > +
> > > dst = list_lru_from_memcg_idx(nlru, dst_idx);
> > > + if (!dst) {
> > > + /* TODO: Use __GFP_NOFAIL? */
> > > + dst = kmalloc(sizeof(struct list_lru_one), GFP_ATOMIC);
> > > + init_one_lru(dst);
> > > + memcg_lrus = rcu_dereference_protected(nlru->memcg_lrus, true);
> > > + memcg_lrus->lru[dst_idx] = dst;
> > > + }
>
> Hm, can't we just reuse src as dst in this case?
> We don't need src anymore and we're basically allocating dst to move all data from src.
Yes, we can do that and it would be much simpler.
> If not, we can allocate up to the root memcg every time to avoid having
> !dst case and fiddle with __GFP_NOFAIL.
>
> Otherwise I like the idea and I think it might reduce the memory overhead
> especially on (very) big machines.
Yes, I will however have to check if the callers of list_lru_add() are capable
of handling failure which can happen with this approach if kmalloc fails.
Regards,
Bharata.
