From: Zefan Li <lizefan@huawei.com>
To: Michal Hocko <mhocko@kernel.org>, Roman Gushchin <guro@fb.com>
Cc: Johannes Weiner <hannes@cmpxchg.org>,
Vladimir Davydov <vdavydov.dev@gmail.com>,
Cgroups <cgroups@vger.kernel.org>, <linux-mm@kvack.org>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
Shakeel Butt <shakeelb@google.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] memcg: Fix memcg_kmem_bypass() for remote memcg charging
Date: Fri, 15 May 2020 16:20:04 +0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <bad0e16b-7141-94c0-45f6-6ed03926b5f8@huawei.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20200515065645.GD29153@dhcp22.suse.cz>
On 2020/5/15 14:56, Michal Hocko wrote:
> On Thu 14-05-20 15:52:59, Roman Gushchin wrote:
>> On Thu, May 14, 2020 at 09:16:29AM +0800, Zefan Li wrote:
>>> On 2020/5/14 0:11, Roman Gushchin wrote:
>>>> 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 <lizefan@huawei.com>
>>>>> ---
>>>>>
>>>>> 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;
>>>> }
>>>>
>>>
>>> I thought the user should ensure not do this, but now I think it makes sense to just bypass
>>> the interrupt case.
>>
>> I think now it's mostly a legacy of the opt-out kernel memory accounting.
>> Actually we can relax this requirement by forcibly overcommit the memory cgroup
>> if the allocation is happening from the irq context, and punish it afterwards.
>> Idk how much we wanna this, hopefully nobody is allocating large non-temporarily
>> objects from an irq.
>
> I do not think we want to pretend that remote charging from the IRQ
> context is supported. Why don't we simply WARN_ON(in_interrupt()) there?
>
How about:
static inline bool memcg_kmem_bypass(void)
{
if (in_interrupt()) {
WARN_ON(current->active_memcg);
return true;
}
/* Allow remote memcg charging in kthread contexts. */
if ((!current->mm || (current->flags & PF_KTHREAD)) && !current->active_memcg)
return true;
return false;
}
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2020-05-15 8:20 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 20+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2020-05-13 7:28 [PATCH] memcg: Fix memcg_kmem_bypass() for remote memcg charging Zefan Li
2020-05-13 9:05 ` Michal Hocko
2020-05-13 11:19 ` Zefan Li
2020-05-13 11:29 ` Michal Hocko
2020-05-13 11:47 ` [PATCH v2] " Zefan Li
2020-05-13 12:22 ` Shakeel Butt
2020-05-13 13:05 ` Johannes Weiner
2020-05-13 16:11 ` Roman Gushchin
2020-05-14 1:16 ` Zefan Li
2020-05-14 22:52 ` Roman Gushchin
2020-05-15 6:56 ` Michal Hocko
2020-05-15 8:20 ` Zefan Li [this message]
2020-05-15 8:34 ` Michal Hocko
2020-05-15 16:22 ` Shakeel Butt
2020-05-15 17:31 ` Roman Gushchin
2020-05-18 9:13 ` Michal Hocko
2020-05-26 1:25 ` [PATCH v3] " Zefan Li
2020-05-26 15:53 ` Roman Gushchin
2020-05-27 16:50 ` Shakeel Butt
2020-05-28 14:44 ` 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=bad0e16b-7141-94c0-45f6-6ed03926b5f8@huawei.com \
--to=lizefan@huawei.com \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=cgroups@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=guro@fb.com \
--cc=hannes@cmpxchg.org \
--cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
--cc=mhocko@kernel.org \
--cc=shakeelb@google.com \
--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).