linux-mm.kvack.org archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Kirill Tkhai <ktkhai@virtuozzo.com>
To: Yang Shi <shy828301@gmail.com>,
	guro@fb.com, shakeelb@google.com, david@fromorbit.com,
	hannes@cmpxchg.org, mhocko@suse.com, akpm@linux-foundation.org
Cc: linux-mm@kvack.org, linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org,
	linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [v3 PATCH 07/11] mm: vmscan: add per memcg shrinker nr_deferred
Date: Wed, 6 Jan 2021 14:06:06 +0300	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <a3452140-9f88-3cb9-0359-ca374f9e9d9d@virtuozzo.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20210105225817.1036378-8-shy828301@gmail.com>

On 06.01.2021 01:58, Yang Shi wrote:
> Currently the number of deferred objects are per shrinker, but some slabs, for example,
> vfs inode/dentry cache are per memcg, this would result in poor isolation among memcgs.
> 
> The deferred objects typically are generated by __GFP_NOFS allocations, one memcg with
> excessive __GFP_NOFS allocations may blow up deferred objects, then other innocent memcgs
> may suffer from over shrink, excessive reclaim latency, etc.
> 
> For example, two workloads run in memcgA and memcgB respectively, workload in B is vfs
> heavy workload.  Workload in A generates excessive deferred objects, then B's vfs cache
> might be hit heavily (drop half of caches) by B's limit reclaim or global reclaim.
> 
> We observed this hit in our production environment which was running vfs heavy workload
> shown as the below tracing log:
> 
> <...>-409454 [016] .... 28286961.747146: mm_shrink_slab_start: super_cache_scan+0x0/0x1a0 ffff9a83046f3458:
> nid: 1 objects to shrink 3641681686040 gfp_flags GFP_HIGHUSER_MOVABLE|__GFP_ZERO pgs_scanned 1 lru_pgs 15721
> cache items 246404277 delta 31345 total_scan 123202138
> <...>-409454 [022] .... 28287105.928018: mm_shrink_slab_end: super_cache_scan+0x0/0x1a0 ffff9a83046f3458:
> nid: 1 unused scan count 3641681686040 new scan count 3641798379189 total_scan 602
> last shrinker return val 123186855
> 
> The vfs cache and page cache ration was 10:1 on this machine, and half of caches were dropped.
> This also resulted in significant amount of page caches were dropped due to inodes eviction.
> 
> Make nr_deferred per memcg for memcg aware shrinkers would solve the unfairness and bring
> better isolation.
> 
> When memcg is not enabled (!CONFIG_MEMCG or memcg disabled), the shrinker's nr_deferred
> would be used.  And non memcg aware shrinkers use shrinker's nr_deferred all the time.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Yang Shi <shy828301@gmail.com>
> ---
>  include/linux/memcontrol.h |  7 +++---
>  mm/vmscan.c                | 49 +++++++++++++++++++++++++-------------
>  2 files changed, 37 insertions(+), 19 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/include/linux/memcontrol.h b/include/linux/memcontrol.h
> index e05bbe8277cc..5599082df623 100644
> --- a/include/linux/memcontrol.h
> +++ b/include/linux/memcontrol.h
> @@ -93,12 +93,13 @@ struct lruvec_stat {
>  };
>  
>  /*
> - * Bitmap of shrinker::id corresponding to memcg-aware shrinkers,
> - * which have elements charged to this memcg.
> + * Bitmap and deferred work of shrinker::id corresponding to memcg-aware
> + * shrinkers, which have elements charged to this memcg.
>   */
>  struct memcg_shrinker_info {
>  	struct rcu_head rcu;
> -	unsigned long map[];
> +	unsigned long *map;
> +	atomic_long_t *nr_deferred;
>  };
>  
>  /*
> diff --git a/mm/vmscan.c b/mm/vmscan.c
> index 0033659abf9e..72259253e414 100644
> --- a/mm/vmscan.c
> +++ b/mm/vmscan.c
> @@ -193,10 +193,12 @@ static void memcg_free_shrinker_info_rcu(struct rcu_head *head)
>  }
>  
>  static int memcg_expand_one_shrinker_info(struct mem_cgroup *memcg,
> -					  int size, int old_size)
> +					  int m_size, int d_size,
> +					  int old_m_size, int old_d_size)
>  {
>  	struct memcg_shrinker_info *new, *old;
>  	int nid;
> +	int size = m_size + d_size;
>  
>  	for_each_node(nid) {
>  		old = rcu_dereference_protected(
> @@ -209,9 +211,18 @@ static int memcg_expand_one_shrinker_info(struct mem_cgroup *memcg,
>  		if (!new)
>  			return -ENOMEM;
>  
> -		/* Set all old bits, clear all new bits */
> -		memset(new->map, (int)0xff, old_size);
> -		memset((void *)new->map + old_size, 0, size - old_size);
> +		new->map = (unsigned long *)((unsigned long)new + sizeof(*new));
> +		new->nr_deferred = (atomic_long_t *)((unsigned long)new +
> +					sizeof(*new) + m_size);

Can't we write this more compact?

		new->map = (unsigned long *)(new + 1);
		new->nr_deferred = (atomic_long_t)(new->map + 1);

> +
> +		/* map: set all old bits, clear all new bits */
> +		memset(new->map, (int)0xff, old_m_size);
> +		memset((void *)new->map + old_m_size, 0, m_size - old_m_size);
> +		/* nr_deferred: copy old values, clear all new values */
> +		memcpy((void *)new->nr_deferred, (void *)old->nr_deferred,
> +		       old_d_size);

Why not
	 	memcpy(new->nr_deferred, old->nr_deferred, old_d_size);
?

> +		memset((void *)new->nr_deferred + old_d_size, 0,
> +		       d_size - old_d_size);
>  
>  		rcu_assign_pointer(memcg->nodeinfo[nid]->shrinker_info, new);
>  		call_rcu(&old->rcu, memcg_free_shrinker_info_rcu);
> @@ -226,9 +237,6 @@ void memcg_free_shrinker_info(struct mem_cgroup *memcg)
>  	struct memcg_shrinker_info *info;
>  	int nid;
>  
> -	if (mem_cgroup_is_root(memcg))
> -		return;
> -
>  	for_each_node(nid) {
>  		pn = mem_cgroup_nodeinfo(memcg, nid);
>  		info = rcu_dereference_protected(pn->shrinker_info, true);
> @@ -242,12 +250,13 @@ int memcg_alloc_shrinker_info(struct mem_cgroup *memcg)
>  {
>  	struct memcg_shrinker_info *info;
>  	int nid, size, ret = 0;
> -
> -	if (mem_cgroup_is_root(memcg))
> -		return 0;
> +	int m_size, d_size = 0;
>  
>  	down_read(&shrinker_rwsem);
> -	size = DIV_ROUND_UP(shrinker_nr_max, BITS_PER_LONG) * sizeof(unsigned long);
> +	m_size = DIV_ROUND_UP(shrinker_nr_max, BITS_PER_LONG) * sizeof(unsigned long);
> +	d_size = shrinker_nr_max * sizeof(atomic_long_t);
> +	size = m_size + d_size;
> +
>  	for_each_node(nid) {
>  		info = kvzalloc(sizeof(*info) + size, GFP_KERNEL);
>  		if (!info) {
> @@ -255,6 +264,9 @@ int memcg_alloc_shrinker_info(struct mem_cgroup *memcg)
>  			ret = -ENOMEM;
>  			break;
>  		}
> +		info->map = (unsigned long *)((unsigned long)info + sizeof(*info));
> +		info->nr_deferred = (atomic_long_t *)((unsigned long)info +
> +					sizeof(*info) + m_size);
>  		rcu_assign_pointer(memcg->nodeinfo[nid]->shrinker_info, info);
>  	}
>  	up_read(&shrinker_rwsem);
> @@ -265,10 +277,16 @@ int memcg_alloc_shrinker_info(struct mem_cgroup *memcg)
>  static int memcg_expand_shrinker_info(int new_id)
>  {
>  	int size, old_size, ret = 0;
> +	int m_size, d_size = 0;
> +	int old_m_size, old_d_size = 0;
>  	struct mem_cgroup *memcg;
>  
> -	size = DIV_ROUND_UP(new_id + 1, BITS_PER_LONG) * sizeof(unsigned long);
> -	old_size = DIV_ROUND_UP(shrinker_nr_max, BITS_PER_LONG) * sizeof(unsigned long);
> +	m_size = DIV_ROUND_UP(new_id + 1, BITS_PER_LONG) * sizeof(unsigned long);
> +	d_size = (new_id + 1) * sizeof(atomic_long_t);
> +	size = m_size + d_size;
> +	old_m_size = DIV_ROUND_UP(shrinker_nr_max, BITS_PER_LONG) * sizeof(unsigned long);
> +	old_d_size = shrinker_nr_max * sizeof(atomic_long_t);
> +	old_size = old_m_size + old_d_size;
>  	if (size <= old_size)
>  		return 0;

This replication of patch [4/11] looks awkwardly. Please, try to incorporate
the same changes to nr_deferred as I requested for shrinker_map in [4/11].

>  
> @@ -277,9 +295,8 @@ static int memcg_expand_shrinker_info(int new_id)
>  
>  	memcg = mem_cgroup_iter(NULL, NULL, NULL);
>  	do {
> -		if (mem_cgroup_is_root(memcg))
> -			continue;
> -		ret = memcg_expand_one_shrinker_info(memcg, size, old_size);
> +		ret = memcg_expand_one_shrinker_info(memcg, m_size, d_size,
> +						     old_m_size, old_d_size);
>  		if (ret) {
>  			mem_cgroup_iter_break(NULL, memcg);
>  			goto out;
> 



  reply	other threads:[~2021-01-06 11:07 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 43+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2021-01-05 22:58 [RFC v3 PATCH 0/11] Make shrinker's nr_deferred memcg aware Yang Shi
2021-01-05 22:58 ` [v3 PATCH 01/11] mm: vmscan: use nid from shrink_control for tracepoint Yang Shi
2021-01-05 22:58 ` [v3 PATCH 02/11] mm: vmscan: consolidate shrinker_maps handling code Yang Shi
2021-01-07  0:13   ` Roman Gushchin
2021-01-07 17:29     ` Yang Shi
2021-01-11 19:00     ` Yang Shi
2021-01-11 19:37       ` Roman Gushchin
2021-01-11 19:43         ` Yang Shi
2021-01-05 22:58 ` [v3 PATCH 03/11] mm: vmscan: use shrinker_rwsem to protect shrinker_maps allocation Yang Shi
2021-01-06  9:54   ` Kirill Tkhai
2021-01-11 17:08     ` Yang Shi
2021-01-11 17:33       ` Kirill Tkhai
2021-01-11 18:57         ` Yang Shi
2021-01-11 21:33           ` Kirill Tkhai
2021-01-12 21:23             ` Yang Shi
2021-01-13 18:16               ` Yang Shi
2021-01-05 22:58 ` [v3 PATCH 04/11] mm: vmscan: remove memcg_shrinker_map_size Yang Shi
2021-01-06 10:15   ` Kirill Tkhai
2021-01-11 17:44     ` Yang Shi
2021-01-13 23:48     ` Yang Shi
2021-01-05 22:58 ` [v3 PATCH 05/11] mm: vmscan: use a new flag to indicate shrinker is registered Yang Shi
2021-01-06 10:21   ` Kirill Tkhai
2021-01-11 18:17     ` Yang Shi
2021-01-11 21:37       ` Kirill Tkhai
2021-01-12 20:58         ` Yang Shi
2021-01-05 22:58 ` [v3 PATCH 06/11] mm: memcontrol: rename shrinker_map to shrinker_info Yang Shi
2021-01-06 11:38   ` Kirill Tkhai
2021-01-11 18:19     ` Yang Shi
2021-01-05 22:58 ` [v3 PATCH 07/11] mm: vmscan: add per memcg shrinker nr_deferred Yang Shi
2021-01-06 11:06   ` Kirill Tkhai [this message]
2021-01-11 18:24     ` Yang Shi
2021-01-13 23:30     ` Yang Shi
2021-01-05 22:58 ` [v3 PATCH 08/11] mm: vmscan: use per memcg nr_deferred of shrinker Yang Shi
2021-01-07  0:17   ` Roman Gushchin
2021-01-07 17:34     ` Yang Shi
2021-01-05 22:58 ` [v3 PATCH 09/11] mm: vmscan: don't need allocate shrinker->nr_deferred for memcg aware shrinkers Yang Shi
2021-01-06 11:15   ` Kirill Tkhai
2021-01-11 18:40     ` Yang Shi
2021-01-11 21:57       ` Kirill Tkhai
2021-01-05 22:58 ` [v3 PATCH 10/11] mm: memcontrol: reparent nr_deferred when memcg offline Yang Shi
2021-01-06 11:34   ` Kirill Tkhai
2021-01-11 18:43     ` Yang Shi
2021-01-05 22:58 ` [v3 PATCH 11/11] mm: vmscan: shrink deferred objects proportional to priority Yang Shi

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=a3452140-9f88-3cb9-0359-ca374f9e9d9d@virtuozzo.com \
    --to=ktkhai@virtuozzo.com \
    --cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
    --cc=david@fromorbit.com \
    --cc=guro@fb.com \
    --cc=hannes@cmpxchg.org \
    --cc=linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
    --cc=mhocko@suse.com \
    --cc=shakeelb@google.com \
    --cc=shy828301@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).