Re: [PATCH REBASED] mm, memcg: Make scan aggression always exclude protection

[Michal Hocko]

On Thu 30-05-19 13:52:10, Chris Down wrote:
> Michal Hocko writes:
> > On Wed 29-05-19 23:44:53, Chris Down wrote:
> > > Michal Hocko writes:
> > > > Maybe I am missing something so correct me if I am wrong but the new
> > > > calculation actually means that we always allow to scan even min
> > > > protected memcgs right?
> > > 
> > > We check if the memcg is min protected as a precondition for coming into
> > > this function at all, so this generally isn't possible. See the
> > > mem_cgroup_protected MEMCG_PROT_MIN check in shrink_node.
> > 
> > OK, that is the part I was missing, I got confused by checking the min
> > limit as well here. Thanks for the clarification. A comment would be
> > handy or do we really need to consider min at all?
> 
> You mean as part of the reclaim pressure calculation? Yeah, we still need
> it, because we might only set memory.min, but not set memory.low.

But then the memcg will get excluded as well right?
-- 
Michal Hocko
SUSE Labs