Re: [PATCH v2] mm: vmstat: fix /proc/sys/vm/stat_refresh generating false warnings

[Roman Gushchin]

On Thu, Feb 25, 2021 at 09:21:04AM -0800, Hugh Dickins wrote:
> On Wed, 24 Feb 2021, Roman Gushchin wrote:
> > On Tue, Feb 23, 2021 at 11:24:23PM -0800, Hugh Dickins wrote:
> > > On Thu, 6 Aug 2020, Andrew Morton wrote:
> > > > On Thu, 6 Aug 2020 16:38:04 -0700 Roman Gushchin <guro@xxxxxx> wrote:
> > > 
> > > August, yikes, I thought it was much more recent.
> > > 
> > > > 
> > > > > it seems that Hugh and me haven't reached a consensus here.
> > > > > Can, you, please, not merge this patch into 5.9, so we would have
> > > > > more time to find a solution, acceptable for all?
> > > > 
> > > > No probs.  I already had a big red asterisk on it ;)
> > > 
> > > I've a suspicion that Andrew might be tiring of his big red asterisk,
> > > and wanting to unload
> > > mm-vmstat-fix-proc-sys-vm-stat_refresh-generating-false-warnings.patch
> > > mm-vmstat-fix-proc-sys-vm-stat_refresh-generating-false-warnings-fix.patch
> > > mm-vmstat-fix-proc-sys-vm-stat_refresh-generating-false-warnings-fix-2.patch
> > > into 5.12.
> > > 
> > > I would prefer not, and reiterate my Nack: but no great harm will
> > > befall the cosmos if he overrules that, and it does go through to
> > > 5.12 - I'll just want to revert it again later.  And I do think a
> > > more straightforward way of suppressing those warnings would be just
> > > to delete the code that issues them, rather than brushing them under
> > > a carpet of overtuning.
> > 
> > I'm actually fine with either option. My only concern is that if somebody
> > will try to use the hugetlb_cma boot option AND /proc/sys/vm/stat_refresh
> > together, they will get a false warning and report them to mm@ or will
> > waste their time trying to debug a non-existing problem. It's not the end
> > of the world.
> > We can also make the warning conditional on CONFIG_DEBUG_VM, for example.
> > 
> > Please, let me know what's your preferred way to go forward.
> 
> My preferred way forward (for now: since we're all too busy to fix
> the misbehaving stats) is for Andrew to drop your patch, and I'll post
> three patches against current 5.12 in a few hours: one to restore the
> check on the missing NR_VM_NODE_STAT_ITEMS, one to remove the -EINVAL
> (which upsets test scripts at our end), one to suppress the warning on
> nr_zone_write_pending, nr_writeback and nr_free_cma.

I'd totally support it!

Please, cc me and I'll be happy to review/ack your patches.

Thanks!