linux-block.vger.kernel.org archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Johannes Weiner <hannes@cmpxchg.org>
To: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>, Jens Axboe <axboe@kernel.dk>
Cc: Dan Schatzberg <schatzberg.dan@gmail.com>,
	Tejun Heo <tj@kernel.org>, Zefan Li <lizefan.x@bytedance.com>,
	Michal Hocko <mhocko@kernel.org>,
	Vladimir Davydov <vdavydov.dev@gmail.com>,
	Hugh Dickins <hughd@google.com>,
	Shakeel Butt <shakeelb@google.com>, Roman Gushchin <guro@fb.com>,
	Muchun Song <songmuchun@bytedance.com>,
	Yang Shi <shy828301@gmail.com>,
	Alex Shi <alex.shi@linux.alibaba.com>,
	Alexander Duyck <alexander.h.duyck@linux.intel.com>,
	Wei Yang <richard.weiyang@gmail.com>,
	"open list:BLOCK LAYER" <linux-block@vger.kernel.org>,
	open list <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
	"open list:CONTROL GROUP (CGROUP)" <cgroups@vger.kernel.org>,
	"open list:MEMORY MANAGEMENT" <linux-mm@kvack.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH V12 0/3] Charge loop device i/o to issuing cgroup
Date: Mon, 12 Apr 2021 11:45:43 -0400	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <YHRrJ9V6ivpH2QUN@cmpxchg.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20210402191638.3249835-1-schatzberg.dan@gmail.com>

It looks like all feedback has been addressed and there hasn't been
any new activity on it in a while.

As per the suggestion last time [1], Andrew, Jens, could this go
through the -mm tree to deal with the memcg conflicts?

[1] https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/CALvZod6FMQQC17Zsu9xoKs=dFWaJdMC2Qk3YiDPUUQHx8teLYg@mail.gmail.com/

On Fri, Apr 02, 2021 at 12:16:31PM -0700, Dan Schatzberg wrote:
> No major changes, rebased on top of latest mm tree
> 
> Changes since V12:
> 
> * Small change to get_mem_cgroup_from_mm to avoid needing
>   get_active_memcg
> 
> Changes since V11:
> 
> * Removed WQ_MEM_RECLAIM flag from loop workqueue. Technically, this
>   can be driven by writeback, but this was causing a warning in xfs
>   and likely other filesystems aren't equipped to be driven by reclaim
>   at the VFS layer.
> * Included a small fix from Colin Ian King.
> * reworked get_mem_cgroup_from_mm to institute the necessary charge
>   priority.
> 
> Changes since V10:
> 
> * Added page-cache charging to mm: Charge active memcg when no mm is set
> 
> Changes since V9:
> 
> * Rebased against linus's branch which now includes Roman Gushchin's
>   patch this series is based off of
> 
> Changes since V8:
> 
> * Rebased on top of Roman Gushchin's patch
>   (https://lkml.org/lkml/2020/8/21/1464) which provides the nesting
>   support for setting active memcg. Dropped the patch from this series
>   that did the same thing.
> 
> Changes since V7:
> 
> * Rebased against linus's branch
> 
> Changes since V6:
> 
> * Added separate spinlock for worker synchronization
> * Minor style changes
> 
> Changes since V5:
> 
> * Fixed a missing css_put when failing to allocate a worker
> * Minor style changes
> 
> Changes since V4:
> 
> Only patches 1 and 2 have changed.
> 
> * Fixed irq lock ordering bug
> * Simplified loop detach
> * Added support for nesting memalloc_use_memcg
> 
> Changes since V3:
> 
> * Fix race on loop device destruction and deferred worker cleanup
> * Ensure charge on shmem_swapin_page works just like getpage
> * Minor style changes
> 
> Changes since V2:
> 
> * Deferred destruction of workqueue items so in the common case there
>   is no allocation needed
> 
> Changes since V1:
> 
> * Split out and reordered patches so cgroup charging changes are
>   separate from kworker -> workqueue change
> 
> * Add mem_css to struct loop_cmd to simplify logic
> 
> The loop device runs all i/o to the backing file on a separate kworker
> thread which results in all i/o being charged to the root cgroup. This
> allows a loop device to be used to trivially bypass resource limits
> and other policy. This patch series fixes this gap in accounting.
> 
> A simple script to demonstrate this behavior on cgroupv2 machine:
> 
> '''
> #!/bin/bash
> set -e
> 
> CGROUP=/sys/fs/cgroup/test.slice
> LOOP_DEV=/dev/loop0
> 
> if [[ ! -d $CGROUP ]]
> then
>     sudo mkdir $CGROUP
> fi
> 
> grep oom_kill $CGROUP/memory.events
> 
> # Set a memory limit, write more than that limit to tmpfs -> OOM kill
> sudo unshare -m bash -c "
> echo \$\$ > $CGROUP/cgroup.procs;
> echo 0 > $CGROUP/memory.swap.max;
> echo 64M > $CGROUP/memory.max;
> mount -t tmpfs -o size=512m tmpfs /tmp;
> dd if=/dev/zero of=/tmp/file bs=1M count=256" || true
> 
> grep oom_kill $CGROUP/memory.events
> 
> # Set a memory limit, write more than that limit through loopback
> # device -> no OOM kill
> sudo unshare -m bash -c "
> echo \$\$ > $CGROUP/cgroup.procs;
> echo 0 > $CGROUP/memory.swap.max;
> echo 64M > $CGROUP/memory.max;
> mount -t tmpfs -o size=512m tmpfs /tmp;
> truncate -s 512m /tmp/backing_file
> losetup $LOOP_DEV /tmp/backing_file
> dd if=/dev/zero of=$LOOP_DEV bs=1M count=256;
> losetup -D $LOOP_DEV" || true
> 
> grep oom_kill $CGROUP/memory.events
> '''
> 
> Naively charging cgroups could result in priority inversions through
> the single kworker thread in the case where multiple cgroups are
> reading/writing to the same loop device. This patch series does some
> minor modification to the loop driver so that each cgroup can make
> forward progress independently to avoid this inversion.
> 
> With this patch series applied, the above script triggers OOM kills
> when writing through the loop device as expected.
> 
> Dan Schatzberg (3):
>   loop: Use worker per cgroup instead of kworker
>   mm: Charge active memcg when no mm is set
>   loop: Charge i/o to mem and blk cg
> 
>  drivers/block/loop.c       | 244 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++-------
>  drivers/block/loop.h       |  15 ++-
>  include/linux/memcontrol.h |   6 +
>  kernel/cgroup/cgroup.c     |   1 +
>  mm/filemap.c               |   2 +-
>  mm/memcontrol.c            |  49 +++++---
>  mm/shmem.c                 |   4 +-
>  7 files changed, 253 insertions(+), 68 deletions(-)
> 
> -- 
> 2.30.2
> 
> 

  parent reply	other threads:[~2021-04-12 15:45 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 11+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2021-04-02 19:16 [PATCH V12 0/3] Charge loop device i/o to issuing cgroup Dan Schatzberg
2021-04-02 19:16 ` [PATCH 1/3] loop: Use worker per cgroup instead of kworker Dan Schatzberg
2021-04-06  1:44   ` Ming Lei
2021-04-02 19:16 ` [PATCH 2/3] mm: Charge active memcg when no mm is set Dan Schatzberg
2021-04-03  5:47   ` [External] " Muchun Song
2021-04-02 19:16 ` [PATCH 3/3] loop: Charge i/o to mem and blk cg Dan Schatzberg
2021-04-06  3:23   ` Ming Lei
     [not found] ` <20210403020902.1384-1-hdanton@sina.com>
2021-04-06 18:59   ` [PATCH 1/3] loop: Use worker per cgroup instead of kworker Dan Schatzberg
     [not found]   ` <20210407065300.1478-1-hdanton@sina.com>
2021-04-07 14:43     ` Dan Schatzberg
2021-04-12 15:45 ` Johannes Weiner [this message]
2021-04-12 15:50   ` [PATCH V12 0/3] Charge loop device i/o to issuing cgroup Jens Axboe

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=YHRrJ9V6ivpH2QUN@cmpxchg.org \
    --to=hannes@cmpxchg.org \
    --cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
    --cc=alex.shi@linux.alibaba.com \
    --cc=alexander.h.duyck@linux.intel.com \
    --cc=axboe@kernel.dk \
    --cc=cgroups@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=guro@fb.com \
    --cc=hughd@google.com \
    --cc=linux-block@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
    --cc=lizefan.x@bytedance.com \
    --cc=mhocko@kernel.org \
    --cc=richard.weiyang@gmail.com \
    --cc=schatzberg.dan@gmail.com \
    --cc=shakeelb@google.com \
    --cc=shy828301@gmail.com \
    --cc=songmuchun@bytedance.com \
    --cc=tj@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).