Re: [PATCH] mm: memcontrol: move memsw charge callbacks to v1

[Shakeel Butt]

On Fri, Jan 24, 2025 at 12:41:32AM -0500, Johannes Weiner wrote:
> The interweaving of two entirely different swap accounting strategies
> has been one of the more confusing parts of the memcg code. Split out
> the v1 code to clarify the implementation and a handful of callsites,
> and to avoid building the v1 bits when !CONFIG_MEMCG_V1.
> 
>    text	  data	   bss	   dec	   hex	filename
>   39253	  6446	  4160	 49859	  c2c3	mm/memcontrol.o.old
>   38877	  6382	  4160	 49419	  c10b	mm/memcontrol.o
> 
> Signed-off-by: Johannes Weiner <hannes@xxxxxxxxxxx>

Thanks Johannes for the patch as it is related to the topic which I
think we need to make a decision on i.e. v1's swap accounting semantics
in v2. I know Google and Tencent [1] are still very deeply dependent on
v1's swap accounting semantics.

Folks from Google and Tencent, if this topic is still relevant for you,
can you please propose a LSFMM topic for this (or any other forum where
we can reach a decision).

[1] https://lore.kernel.org/all/CAMgjq7ARr0=OG8GQOJvzLtfdrtiwvJ19-mx1snxqmLE0Za+QCw@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx/