drm/ttm: Use common ancestor of evictor and evictee as limit pool

When checking whether to skip certain buffers because they're protected
by dmem.low, we're checking the effective protection of the evictee's
cgroup, but depending on how the evictor's cgroup relates to the
evictee's, the semantics of effective protection values change.

When testing against cgroups from different subtrees, page_counter's
recursive protection propagates memory protection afforded to a parent
down to the child cgroups, even if the children were not explicitly
protected. This prevents cgroups whose parents were afforded no
protection from stealing memory from cgroups whose parents were afforded
more protection, without users having to explicitly propagate this
protection.

However, if we always calculate protection from the root cgroup, this
breaks prioritization of sibling cgroups: If one cgroup was explicitly
protected and its siblings were not, the protected cgroup should get
higher priority, i.e. the protected cgroup should be able to steal from
unprotected siblings. This only works if we restrict the protection
calculation to the subtree shared by evictor and evictee.

Reviewed-by: Maarten Lankhorst <dev@lankhorst.se>
Reviewed-by: Timur Kristóf <timur.kristof@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: Natalie Vock <natalie.vock@gmx.de>
Link: https://patch.msgid.link/20260804-dmemcg-aggressive-protect-v8-6-07af96681bf8@gmx.de

0 files changed, 0 insertions, 0 deletions