On Wed 17-07-24 16:44:53, Johannes Weiner wrote: [...]
The problem is that once global resetting is allowed, it makes the number reported in memory.peak unreliable for everyone. You just don't know, and can't tell, if somebody wrote to it recently. It's not too much of a leap to say this breaks the existing interface contract.
I do not remember any bug reports from v1 where there was a max usage misreported because of uncoordinated value reseting. So while you are right that this is theoretically possible I am not convinced this is a real problem in practice.
On the other hand it seems there is a wider agreement this shouldn't be added to v2 and I do respect that.
You have to decide whether the above is worth implementing. But my take is that the downsides of the simpler solution outweigh its benefits.
While this seems quite elegant I am not convinced this is really worth the additional code for a metric like peak memory consumption which is a very limited metric in a presence of memory reclaim.
Thanks!