From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-6.8 required=3.0 tests=DKIM_SIGNED,DKIM_VALID, DKIM_VALID_AU,HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,INCLUDES_PATCH,MAILING_LIST_MULTI, MSGID_FROM_MTA_HEADER,SIGNED_OFF_BY,SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS,URIBL_BLOCKED autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1DB27C433DF for ; Wed, 13 May 2020 16:12:52 +0000 (UTC) Received: from kanga.kvack.org (kanga.kvack.org [205.233.56.17]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0D14D204EC for ; Wed, 13 May 2020 16:12:51 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=fb.com header.i=@fb.com header.b="MXedZEZy"; dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=fb.onmicrosoft.com header.i=@fb.onmicrosoft.com header.b="MJZvbtQG" DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.3.2 mail.kernel.org 0D14D204EC Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dmarc=fail (p=quarantine dis=none) header.from=fb.com Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=owner-linux-mm@kvack.org Received: by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix) id 00B4680018; Wed, 13 May 2020 12:12:51 -0400 (EDT) Received: by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix, from userid 40) id EFF998000B; Wed, 13 May 2020 12:12:50 -0400 (EDT) X-Delivered-To: int-list-linux-mm@kvack.org Received: by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix, from userid 63042) id DED2180018; Wed, 13 May 2020 12:12:50 -0400 (EDT) X-Delivered-To: linux-mm@kvack.org Received: from forelay.hostedemail.com (smtprelay0037.hostedemail.com [216.40.44.37]) by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id C597C8000B for ; Wed, 13 May 2020 12:12:50 -0400 (EDT) Received: from smtpin01.hostedemail.com (10.5.19.251.rfc1918.com [10.5.19.251]) by forelay03.hostedemail.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 87E308248047 for ; Wed, 13 May 2020 16:12:50 +0000 (UTC) X-FDA: 76812189300.01.bath27_35d3a0ef02c0a X-HE-Tag: bath27_35d3a0ef02c0a X-Filterd-Recvd-Size: 9583 Received: from mx0a-00082601.pphosted.com (mx0a-00082601.pphosted.com [67.231.145.42]) by imf16.hostedemail.com (Postfix) with ESMTP for ; Wed, 13 May 2020 16:12:49 +0000 (UTC) Received: from pps.filterd (m0044010.ppops.net [127.0.0.1]) by mx0a-00082601.pphosted.com (8.16.0.42/8.16.0.42) with SMTP id 04DGBUiB002049; Wed, 13 May 2020 09:11:30 -0700 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=fb.com; h=date : from : to : cc : subject : message-id : references : content-type : in-reply-to : mime-version; s=facebook; bh=igsYSo8Rnj6AmhEEXQNL3hz7d88Zd8kYSLUh0Cs0nos=; b=MXedZEZyw5bxnxbfGeyniV729AsiWCIr0AWvMRoaQlNsZgqidsm5cDO4xBi1dX61FP3k IXylAtDI0wxu6hpx9mISYBvsm8sJ4ir1KQyo5FiY5+Ot8DSBpSa/DqTBqhnlWvtZFrGE cuNNBjLP1514vRzJrVy4Rkly8ptPEENb7z0= Received: from mail.thefacebook.com ([163.114.132.120]) by mx0a-00082601.pphosted.com with ESMTP id 3100xb5qg7-1 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128 verify=NOT); Wed, 13 May 2020 09:11:30 -0700 Received: from NAM11-DM6-obe.outbound.protection.outlook.com (100.104.98.9) by o365-in.thefacebook.com (100.104.94.231) with Microsoft SMTP Server (version=TLS1_2, cipher=TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_128_GCM_SHA256) id 15.1.1847.3; Wed, 13 May 2020 09:11:14 -0700 ARC-Seal: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; s=arcselector9901; d=microsoft.com; cv=none; b=iR0H+Iz7MZWrNIL+7u9wzuZPDtTvHAaA+SCdiiQv6+jPyMleHpepWqP5LXeEyd+6R0sv4f9qdnzRdWP2bYT/2qShDFzvS1ufHJtnioELicWvv0BvGa0f2+ZL0Yb6jzKkqqaKSl+r3ObvZdZ/6NJSHXxKqLHPSEJPvBi0zWBxFjG5Tk+su8DK+WkzMw9NX5Dno2FnzziRtuUqMy/F13U/KmhSA9L2IPbtSKyZTeuUfBcX6cxHUSa2xmtDiUP/ZxPOW7adUqq/kpAKvmLfnz2hvjvEQP/B4hiKUBALorsnwNnoGA4AiLP/rmZzUl0ABD0UYuAVOqYmmo4jF7aJF9dguQ== ARC-Message-Signature: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=microsoft.com; s=arcselector9901; h=From:Date:Subject:Message-ID:Content-Type:MIME-Version:X-MS-Exchange-SenderADCheck; bh=igsYSo8Rnj6AmhEEXQNL3hz7d88Zd8kYSLUh0Cs0nos=; b=cStSckZrfC3WwYXtMTQppsH2SqWdlxRzFtNmWk7IPZEss5jDFPjZ9mD27g/80jQDP0A2ycuXocTeN9O4LRCnrsFiq1qhZDbNA14fMMR+3/EtKvwGTTd3mhXTA8KtD5sa0m48LoZe08zY0Tm62t1cIQrLCd9MwEJ+47rW3uz6CEQAaq6Io3GUrnnMpz6eEy7SBaxCkf88kIK5NfW+HDXNa6gvpr36dkQm+H02yFna2R/+jM8P6dfKcQZihu83aP2CPxs2Cu0T0Jg246nzCrnibfiVbALQcEzlVg5uJy/tvRgYFdC6Wf1uVjS9doePi/CwlZS8vj4xN60vB9tmPCxcUw== ARC-Authentication-Results: i=1; mx.microsoft.com 1; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=fb.com; dmarc=pass action=none header.from=fb.com; dkim=pass header.d=fb.com; arc=none DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=fb.onmicrosoft.com; s=selector2-fb-onmicrosoft-com; h=From:Date:Subject:Message-ID:Content-Type:MIME-Version:X-MS-Exchange-SenderADCheck; bh=igsYSo8Rnj6AmhEEXQNL3hz7d88Zd8kYSLUh0Cs0nos=; b=MJZvbtQGba6MreT5VR30DnXgtFKRGpjEiagFzp6TTr2Q9+MiynUxof2a5t+wc8GI6Eln+rcObrXkW8fvNdtDgns0GYzadcHEVRCQlbdXR4Cx86CMrTWXgUTX8Hz1ojygmHY2YBmKU17f6jDaXdAg+DrRXuLYmWJEzdvJ7/eznFs= Authentication-Results: huawei.com; dkim=none (message not signed) header.d=none;huawei.com; dmarc=none action=none header.from=fb.com; Received: from BYAPR15MB4136.namprd15.prod.outlook.com (2603:10b6:a03:96::24) by BYAPR15MB3429.namprd15.prod.outlook.com (2603:10b6:a03:10c::27) with Microsoft SMTP Server (version=TLS1_2, cipher=TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_256_GCM_SHA384) id 15.20.2979.35; Wed, 13 May 2020 16:11:13 +0000 Received: from BYAPR15MB4136.namprd15.prod.outlook.com ([fe80::bdf9:6577:1d2a:a275]) by BYAPR15MB4136.namprd15.prod.outlook.com ([fe80::bdf9:6577:1d2a:a275%7]) with mapi id 15.20.2979.033; Wed, 13 May 2020 16:11:13 +0000 Date: Wed, 13 May 2020 09:11:10 -0700 From: Roman Gushchin To: Zefan Li CC: Michal Hocko , Johannes Weiner , Vladimir Davydov , Cgroups , , Andrew Morton , Shakeel Butt Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] memcg: Fix memcg_kmem_bypass() for remote memcg charging Message-ID: <20200513161110.GA70427@carbon.DHCP.thefacebook.com> References: <20200513090502.GV29153@dhcp22.suse.cz> <76f71776-d049-7407-8574-86b6e9d80704@huawei.com> <20200513112905.GX29153@dhcp22.suse.cz> <3a721f62-5a66-8bc5-247b-5c8b7c51c555@huawei.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <3a721f62-5a66-8bc5-247b-5c8b7c51c555@huawei.com> X-ClientProxiedBy: BY3PR05CA0015.namprd05.prod.outlook.com (2603:10b6:a03:254::20) To BYAPR15MB4136.namprd15.prod.outlook.com (2603:10b6:a03:96::24) MIME-Version: 1.0 X-MS-Exchange-MessageSentRepresentingType: 1 Received: from carbon.DHCP.thefacebook.com (2620:10d:c090:400::5:6c9e) by BY3PR05CA0015.namprd05.prod.outlook.com (2603:10b6:a03:254::20) with Microsoft SMTP Server (version=TLS1_2, cipher=TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_256_GCM_SHA384) id 15.20.3000.12 via Frontend Transport; Wed, 13 May 2020 16:11:12 +0000 X-Originating-IP: [2620:10d:c090:400::5:6c9e] X-MS-PublicTrafficType: Email X-MS-Office365-Filtering-Correlation-Id: 905db2fb-b8ee-4ed4-ce66-08d7f75841d1 X-MS-TrafficTypeDiagnostic: BYAPR15MB3429: X-Microsoft-Antispam-PRVS: X-FB-Source: Internal X-MS-Oob-TLC-OOBClassifiers: OLM:9508; X-Forefront-PRVS: 0402872DA1 X-MS-Exchange-SenderADCheck: 1 X-Microsoft-Antispam: BCL:0; X-Microsoft-Antispam-Message-Info: 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 X-Forefront-Antispam-Report: CIP:255.255.255.255;CTRY:;LANG:en;SCL:1;SRV:;IPV:NLI;SFV:NSPM;H:BYAPR15MB4136.namprd15.prod.outlook.com;PTR:;CAT:NONE;SFTY:;SFS:(396003)(376002)(136003)(39860400002)(366004)(346002)(33430700001)(16526019)(316002)(54906003)(4326008)(33440700001)(66946007)(5660300002)(55016002)(66556008)(86362001)(1076003)(66476007)(8936002)(6916009)(33656002)(6506007)(478600001)(9686003)(52116002)(7696005)(2906002)(8676002)(186003);DIR:OUT;SFP:1102; X-MS-Exchange-AntiSpam-MessageData: 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 X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-Network-Message-Id: 905db2fb-b8ee-4ed4-ce66-08d7f75841d1 X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-OriginalArrivalTime: 13 May 2020 16:11:13.1375 (UTC) X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-FromEntityHeader: Hosted X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-Id: 8ae927fe-1255-47a7-a2af-5f3a069daaa2 X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-MailboxType: HOSTED X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-UserPrincipalName: k35ZsA6RhK7r1cTGIL2llwM2g2XwFhZwiqSYs8XTHx8iOQfWMGQDkMn63v0+8WmQ X-MS-Exchange-Transport-CrossTenantHeadersStamped: BYAPR15MB3429 X-OriginatorOrg: fb.com X-Proofpoint-Virus-Version: vendor=fsecure engine=2.50.10434:6.0.216,18.0.676 definitions=2020-05-13_07:2020-05-13,2020-05-13 signatures=0 X-Proofpoint-Spam-Details: rule=fb_default_notspam policy=fb_default score=0 phishscore=0 cotscore=-2147483648 mlxscore=0 suspectscore=1 lowpriorityscore=0 impostorscore=0 bulkscore=0 spamscore=0 priorityscore=1501 clxscore=1015 malwarescore=0 adultscore=0 mlxlogscore=999 classifier=spam adjust=0 reason=mlx scancount=1 engine=8.12.0-2004280000 definitions=main-2005130141 X-FB-Internal: deliver X-Bogosity: Ham, tests=bogofilter, spamicity=0.000000, version=1.2.4 Sender: owner-linux-mm@kvack.org Precedence: bulk X-Loop: owner-majordomo@kvack.org List-ID: On Wed, May 13, 2020 at 07:47:49PM +0800, Zefan Li wrote: > While trying to use remote memcg charging in an out-of-tree kernel module > I found it's not working, because the current thread is a workqueue thread. > > As we will probably encounter this issue in the future as the users of > memalloc_use_memcg() grow, it's better we fix it now. > > Signed-off-by: Zefan Li > --- > > v2: add a comment as sugguested by Michal. and add changelog to explain why > upstream kernel needs this fix. > > --- > > mm/memcontrol.c | 3 +++ > 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+) > > diff --git a/mm/memcontrol.c b/mm/memcontrol.c > index a3b97f1..43a12ed 100644 > --- a/mm/memcontrol.c > +++ b/mm/memcontrol.c > @@ -2802,6 +2802,9 @@ static void memcg_schedule_kmem_cache_create(struct mem_cgroup *memcg, > > static inline bool memcg_kmem_bypass(void) > { > + /* Allow remote memcg charging in kthread contexts. */ > + if (unlikely(current->active_memcg)) > + return false; > if (in_interrupt() || !current->mm || (current->flags & PF_KTHREAD)) > return true; Shakeel is right about interrupts. How about something like this? static inline bool memcg_kmem_bypass(void) { if (in_interrupt()) return true; if ((!current->mm || current->flags & PF_KTHREAD) && !current->active_memcg) return true; return false; } Thanks! From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Roman Gushchin Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] memcg: Fix memcg_kmem_bypass() for remote memcg charging Date: Wed, 13 May 2020 09:11:10 -0700 Message-ID: <20200513161110.GA70427@carbon.DHCP.thefacebook.com> References: <20200513090502.GV29153@dhcp22.suse.cz> <76f71776-d049-7407-8574-86b6e9d80704@huawei.com> <20200513112905.GX29153@dhcp22.suse.cz> <3a721f62-5a66-8bc5-247b-5c8b7c51c555@huawei.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Return-path: DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=fb.com; h=date : from : to : cc : subject : message-id : references : content-type : in-reply-to : mime-version; s=facebook; bh=igsYSo8Rnj6AmhEEXQNL3hz7d88Zd8kYSLUh0Cs0nos=; b=MXedZEZyw5bxnxbfGeyniV729AsiWCIr0AWvMRoaQlNsZgqidsm5cDO4xBi1dX61FP3k IXylAtDI0wxu6hpx9mISYBvsm8sJ4ir1KQyo5FiY5+Ot8DSBpSa/DqTBqhnlWvtZFrGE cuNNBjLP1514vRzJrVy4Rkly8ptPEENb7z0= DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=fb.onmicrosoft.com; s=selector2-fb-onmicrosoft-com; h=From:Date:Subject:Message-ID:Content-Type:MIME-Version:X-MS-Exchange-SenderADCheck; bh=igsYSo8Rnj6AmhEEXQNL3hz7d88Zd8kYSLUh0Cs0nos=; b=MJZvbtQGba6MreT5VR30DnXgtFKRGpjEiagFzp6TTr2Q9+MiynUxof2a5t+wc8GI6Eln+rcObrXkW8fvNdtDgns0GYzadcHEVRCQlbdXR4Cx86CMrTWXgUTX8Hz1ojygmHY2YBmKU17f6jDaXdAg+DrRXuLYmWJEzdvJ7/eznFs= Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <3a721f62-5a66-8bc5-247b-5c8b7c51c555-hv44wF8Li93QT0dZR+AlfA@public.gmane.org> Sender: cgroups-owner-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org List-ID: Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit To: Zefan Li Cc: Michal Hocko , Johannes Weiner , Vladimir Davydov , Cgroups , linux-mm-Bw31MaZKKs3YtjvyW6yDsg@public.gmane.org, Andrew Morton , Shakeel Butt On Wed, May 13, 2020 at 07:47:49PM +0800, Zefan Li wrote: > While trying to use remote memcg charging in an out-of-tree kernel module > I found it's not working, because the current thread is a workqueue thread. > > As we will probably encounter this issue in the future as the users of > memalloc_use_memcg() grow, it's better we fix it now. > > Signed-off-by: Zefan Li > --- > > v2: add a comment as sugguested by Michal. and add changelog to explain why > upstream kernel needs this fix. > > --- > > mm/memcontrol.c | 3 +++ > 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+) > > diff --git a/mm/memcontrol.c b/mm/memcontrol.c > index a3b97f1..43a12ed 100644 > --- a/mm/memcontrol.c > +++ b/mm/memcontrol.c > @@ -2802,6 +2802,9 @@ static void memcg_schedule_kmem_cache_create(struct mem_cgroup *memcg, > > static inline bool memcg_kmem_bypass(void) > { > + /* Allow remote memcg charging in kthread contexts. */ > + if (unlikely(current->active_memcg)) > + return false; > if (in_interrupt() || !current->mm || (current->flags & PF_KTHREAD)) > return true; Shakeel is right about interrupts. How about something like this? static inline bool memcg_kmem_bypass(void) { if (in_interrupt()) return true; if ((!current->mm || current->flags & PF_KTHREAD) && !current->active_memcg) return true; return false; } Thanks!