On Thu 18-06-20 13:37:43, Chris Down wrote:

Yafang Shao writes:

quoted

On Thu, Jun 18, 2020 at 5:09 AM Chris Down [off-list ref] wrote:

quoted

Naresh Kamboju writes:

quoted

After this patch applied the reported issue got fixed.

Great! Thank you Naresh and Michal for helping to get to the bottom of this :-)

I'll send out a new version tomorrow with the fixes applied and both of you
credited in the changelog for the detection and fix.

As we have already found that the usage around memory.{emin, elow} has
many limitations, I think memory.{emin, elow} should be used for
memcg-tree internally only, that means they can only be used to
calculate the protection of a memcg in a specified memcg-tree but
should not be exposed to other MM parts.

I agree that the current semantics are mentally taxing and we should
generally avoid exposing the implementation details outside of memcg where
possible. Do you have a suggested rework? :-)

I would really prefer to do that work on top of the fixes we (used to)
have in mmotm (with the fixup).
-- 
Michal Hocko
SUSE Labs