From: Michal Hocko <mhocko@kernel.org>
To: Yafang Shao <laoar.shao@gmail.com>
Cc: shakeelb@google.com, chris@chrisdown.name, hannes@cmpxchg.org,
vdavydov.dev@gmail.com, akpm@linux-foundation.org,
linux-mm@kvack.org, stable@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] mm, memcg: fix inconsistent oom event behavior
Date: Tue, 14 Apr 2020 17:22:57 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20200414152257.GP4629@dhcp22.suse.cz> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20200414015952.3590-1-laoar.shao@gmail.com>
On Mon 13-04-20 21:59:52, Yafang Shao wrote:
> A recent commit 9852ae3fe529 ("mm, memcg: consider subtrees in
> memory.events") changes the behavior of memcg events, which will
> consider subtrees in memory.events. But oom_kill event is a special one
> as it is used in both cgroup1 and cgroup2. In cgroup1, it is displayed
> in memory.oom_control. The file memory.oom_control is in both root memcg
> and non root memcg, that is different with memory.event as it only in
> non-root memcg. That commit is okay for cgroup2, but it is not okay for
> cgroup1 as it will cause inconsistent behavior between root memcg and
> non-root memcg.
>
> Here's an example on why this behavior is inconsistent in cgroup1.
> root memcg
> /
> memcg foo
> /
> memcg bar
>
> Suppose there's an oom_kill in memcg bar, then the oon_kill will be
>
> root memcg : memory.oom_control(oom_kill) 0
> /
> memcg foo : memory.oom_control(oom_kill) 1
> /
> memcg bar : memory.oom_control(oom_kill) 1
>
> For the non-root memcg, its memory.oom_control(oom_kill) includes its
> descendants' oom_kill, but for root memcg, it doesn't include its
> descendants' oom_kill. That means, memory.oom_control(oom_kill) has
> different meanings in different memcgs. That is inconsistent. Then the user
> has to know whether the memcg is root or not.
>
> If we can't fully support it in cgroup1, for example by adding
> memory.events.local into cgroup1 as well, then let's don't touch
> its original behavior. So let's recover the original behavior for cgroup1.
Wthe localevents was mostly cgroup v2 feature. I do not think there was
an intention to have side effects on the legacy hierarchy. I thought
this would be the case but it is not apparently. Would it make more
sense to have CGRP_ROOT_MEMORY_LOCAL_EVENTS for legacy hierarchy by
default rather than special casing it somewhere quite deep in the code?
> Fixes: 9852ae3fe529 ("mm, memcg: consider subtrees in memory.events")
> Cc: Chris Down <chris@chrisdown.name>
> Cc: Johannes Weiner <hannes@cmpxchg.org>
> Cc: stable@vger.kernel.org
> Reviewed-by: Shakeel Butt <shakeelb@google.com>
> Signed-off-by: Yafang Shao <laoar.shao@gmail.com>
> ---
> include/linux/memcontrol.h | 3 ++-
> 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
>
> diff --git a/include/linux/memcontrol.h b/include/linux/memcontrol.h
> index 8c340e6b347f..a0ae080a67d1 100644
> --- a/include/linux/memcontrol.h
> +++ b/include/linux/memcontrol.h
> @@ -798,7 +798,8 @@ static inline void memcg_memory_event(struct mem_cgroup *memcg,
> atomic_long_inc(&memcg->memory_events[event]);
> cgroup_file_notify(&memcg->events_file);
>
> - if (cgrp_dfl_root.flags & CGRP_ROOT_MEMORY_LOCAL_EVENTS)
> + if (cgrp_dfl_root.flags & CGRP_ROOT_MEMORY_LOCAL_EVENTS ||
> + !cgroup_subsys_on_dfl(memory_cgrp_subsys))
> break;
> } while ((memcg = parent_mem_cgroup(memcg)) &&
> !mem_cgroup_is_root(memcg));
> --
> 2.18.2
--
Michal Hocko
SUSE Labs
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2020-04-14 15:23 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 10+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2020-04-14 1:59 [PATCH v2] mm, memcg: fix inconsistent oom event behavior Yafang Shao
2020-04-14 15:22 ` Michal Hocko [this message]
2020-04-14 15:57 ` Yafang Shao
2020-04-22 11:06 Yafang Shao
2020-04-22 11:51 ` Michal Hocko
2020-04-22 12:54 ` Johannes Weiner
2020-04-22 12:58 ` Yafang Shao
2020-04-22 13:02 ` Chris Down
2020-04-22 13:15 ` Yafang Shao
2020-04-22 13:15 ` Michal Hocko
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20200414152257.GP4629@dhcp22.suse.cz \
--to=mhocko@kernel.org \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=chris@chrisdown.name \
--cc=hannes@cmpxchg.org \
--cc=laoar.shao@gmail.com \
--cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
--cc=shakeelb@google.com \
--cc=stable@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=vdavydov.dev@gmail.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).