Re: [PATCH v6 0/4] Charge loop device i/o to issuing cgroup

From: Shakeel Butt
Date: Fri Aug 21 2020 - 12:29:25 EST


On Fri, Aug 21, 2020 at 9:02 AM Roman Gushchin <guro@xxxxxx> wrote:
>
> On Fri, Aug 21, 2020 at 11:04:05AM -0400, Dan Schatzberg wrote:
> > On Thu, Aug 20, 2020 at 10:06:44AM -0700, Shakeel Butt wrote:
> > > On Thu, May 28, 2020 at 6:55 AM Dan Schatzberg <schatzberg.dan@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> > > >
> > > > Much of the discussion about this has died down. There's been a
> > > > concern raised that we could generalize infrastructure across loop,
> > > > md, etc. This may be possible, in the future, but it isn't clear to me
> > > > how this would look like. I'm inclined to fix the existing issue with
> > > > loop devices now (this is a problem we hit at FB) and address
> > > > consolidation with other cases if and when those need to be addressed.
> > > >
> > >
> > > What's the status of this series?
> >
> > Thanks for reminding me about this. I haven't got any further
> > feedback. I'll bug Jens to take a look and see if he has any concerns
> > and if not send a rebased version.
>
> Just as a note, I stole a patch from this series called
> "mm: support nesting memalloc_use_memcg()" to use for the bpf memory accounting.
> I rewrote the commit log and rebased to the tot with some trivial changes.
>
> I just sent it upstream:
> https://lore.kernel.org/bpf/20200821150134.2581465-1-guro@xxxxxx/T/#md7edb6b5b940cee1c4d15e3cef17aa8b07328c2e
>
> It looks like we need it for two independent sub-systems, so I wonder
> if we want to route it first through the mm tree as a standalone patch?
>

Another way is to push that patch to 5.9-rc2 linus tree, so both block
and mm branches for 5.10 will have it. (Not sure if that's ok.)