On Wed 10-03-21 12:11:26, Vasily Averin wrote:

On 3/9/21 5:57 PM, Michal Hocko wrote:

quoted

On Tue 09-03-21 11:03:48, Vasily Averin wrote:

quoted

in_interrupt() check in memcg_kmem_bypass() is incorrect because
it does not allow to account memory allocation called from task context
with disabled BH, i.e. inside spin_lock_bh()/spin_unlock_bh() sections

Is there any existing user in the tree? Or is this more of a preparatory
patch for a later one which will need it? In other words, is this a bug
fix or a preparatory work.

struct fib6_node objects are allocated by this way
net/ipv6/route.c::__ip6_ins_rt()
...        write_lock_bh(&table->tb6_lock);
        err = fib6_add(&table->tb6_root, rt, info, mxc);
        write_unlock_bh(&table->tb6_lock);

I spend some time to understand why properly entries from properly configured cache
was not accounted to container's memcg.

OK, that is a valuable information. If there are no other users
currently then I would recommend squashing this patch into the one which
introduces accounting for fib6_node cache (patch 2, IIUC).
-- 
Michal Hocko
SUSE Labs