From: Johannes Weiner <hannes@cmpxchg.org>
To: Sebastian Andrzej Siewior <bigeasy@linutronix.de>
Cc: cgroups@vger.kernel.org, linux-mm@kvack.org,
"Andrew Morton" <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
"Michal Hocko" <mhocko@kernel.org>,
"Michal Koutný" <mkoutny@suse.com>,
"Peter Zijlstra" <peterz@infradead.org>,
"Thomas Gleixner" <tglx@linutronix.de>,
"Vladimir Davydov" <vdavydov.dev@gmail.com>,
"Waiman Long" <longman@redhat.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 3/4] mm/memcg: Protect per-CPU counter by disabling preemption on PREEMPT_RT where needed.
Date: Mon, 14 Feb 2022 11:46:00 -0500 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <YgqHSIa/WvJSXERe@cmpxchg.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20220211223537.2175879-4-bigeasy@linutronix.de>
On Fri, Feb 11, 2022 at 11:35:36PM +0100, Sebastian Andrzej Siewior wrote:
> The per-CPU counter are modified with the non-atomic modifier. The
> consistency is ensured by disabling interrupts for the update.
> On non PREEMPT_RT configuration this works because acquiring a
> spinlock_t typed lock with the _irq() suffix disables interrupts. On
> PREEMPT_RT configurations the RMW operation can be interrupted.
>
> Another problem is that mem_cgroup_swapout() expects to be invoked with
> disabled interrupts because the caller has to acquire a spinlock_t which
> is acquired with disabled interrupts. Since spinlock_t never disables
> interrupts on PREEMPT_RT the interrupts are never disabled at this
> point.
>
> The code is never called from in_irq() context on PREEMPT_RT therefore
> disabling preemption during the update is sufficient on PREEMPT_RT.
> The sections which explicitly disable interrupts can remain on
> PREEMPT_RT because the sections remain short and they don't involve
> sleeping locks (memcg_check_events() is doing nothing on PREEMPT_RT).
>
> Disable preemption during update of the per-CPU variables which do not
> explicitly disable interrupts.
>
> Signed-off-by: Sebastian Andrzej Siewior <bigeasy@linutronix.de>
> ---
> mm/memcontrol.c | 21 +++++++++++++++++++--
> 1 file changed, 19 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/mm/memcontrol.c b/mm/memcontrol.c
> index c1caa662946dc..466466f285cea 100644
> --- a/mm/memcontrol.c
> +++ b/mm/memcontrol.c
> @@ -705,6 +705,8 @@ void __mod_memcg_lruvec_state(struct lruvec *lruvec, enum node_stat_item idx,
> pn = container_of(lruvec, struct mem_cgroup_per_node, lruvec);
> memcg = pn->memcg;
>
> + if (IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_PREEMPT_RT))
> + preempt_disable();
> /* Update memcg */
> __this_cpu_add(memcg->vmstats_percpu->state[idx], val);
>
> @@ -712,6 +714,8 @@ void __mod_memcg_lruvec_state(struct lruvec *lruvec, enum node_stat_item idx,
> __this_cpu_add(pn->lruvec_stats_percpu->state[idx], val);
>
> memcg_rstat_updated(memcg, val);
> + if (IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_PREEMPT_RT))
> + preempt_enable();
> }
I notice you didn't annoate __mod_memcg_state(). I suppose that is
because it's called with explicit local_irq_disable(), and that
disables preemption on rt? And you only need another preempt_disable()
for stacks that rely on coming from spin_lock_irq(save)?
That makes sense, but it's difficult to maintain. It'll easily break
if somebody adds more memory accounting sites that may also rely on an
irq-disabled spinlock somewhere.
So better to make this an unconditional locking protocol:
static void memcg_stats_lock(void)
{
#ifdef CONFIG_PREEMPT_RT
preempt_disable();
#else
VM_BUG_ON(!irqs_disabled());
#endif
}
static void memcg_stats_unlock(void)
{
#ifdef CONFIG_PREEMPT_RT
preempt_enable();
#endif
}
and always use these around the counter updates.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2022-02-14 16:46 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 16+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2022-02-11 22:35 [PATCH v2 0/4] mm/memcg: Address PREEMPT_RT problems instead of disabling it Sebastian Andrzej Siewior
2022-02-11 22:35 ` [PATCH v2 1/4] mm/memcg: Revert ("mm/memcg: optimize user context object stock access") Sebastian Andrzej Siewior
2022-02-14 16:23 ` Johannes Weiner
2022-02-14 19:45 ` Roman Gushchin
2022-02-11 22:35 ` [PATCH v2 2/4] mm/memcg: Disable threshold event handlers on PREEMPT_RT Sebastian Andrzej Siewior
2022-02-14 16:23 ` Johannes Weiner
2022-02-14 19:46 ` Roman Gushchin
2022-02-11 22:35 ` [PATCH v2 3/4] mm/memcg: Protect per-CPU counter by disabling preemption on PREEMPT_RT where needed Sebastian Andrzej Siewior
2022-02-14 16:46 ` Johannes Weiner [this message]
2022-02-14 19:53 ` Roman Gushchin
2022-02-15 18:01 ` Sebastian Andrzej Siewior
2022-02-11 22:35 ` [PATCH v2 4/4] mm/memcg: Protect memcg_stock with a local_lock_t Sebastian Andrzej Siewior
2022-02-14 16:23 ` Johannes Weiner
2022-02-16 15:51 ` Sebastian Andrzej Siewior
2022-02-16 18:08 ` Johannes Weiner
2022-02-17 9:28 ` Sebastian Andrzej Siewior
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=YgqHSIa/WvJSXERe@cmpxchg.org \
--to=hannes@cmpxchg.org \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=bigeasy@linutronix.de \
--cc=cgroups@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
--cc=longman@redhat.com \
--cc=mhocko@kernel.org \
--cc=mkoutny@suse.com \
--cc=peterz@infradead.org \
--cc=tglx@linutronix.de \
--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).