From: Michal Hocko <mhocko@kernel.org>
To: Konstantin Khlebnikov <khlebnikov@yandex-team.ru>
Cc: linux-mm@kvack.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
Vladimir Davydov <vdavydov.dev@gmail.com>,
Johannes Weiner <hannes@cmpxchg.org>, Tejun Heo <tj@kernel.org>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
Mel Gorman <mgorman@techsingularity.net>,
Roman Gushchin <guro@fb.com>,
linux-api@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH RFC] mm/madvise: implement MADV_STOCKPILE (kswapd from user space)
Date: Tue, 28 May 2019 09:38:35 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20190528073835.GP1658@dhcp22.suse.cz> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <a4e5eeb8-3560-d4b4-08a0-8a22c677c0f7@yandex-team.ru>
On Tue 28-05-19 10:30:12, Konstantin Khlebnikov wrote:
> On 28.05.2019 9:51, Michal Hocko wrote:
> > On Tue 28-05-19 09:25:13, Konstantin Khlebnikov wrote:
> > > On 27.05.2019 17:39, Michal Hocko wrote:
> > > > On Mon 27-05-19 16:21:56, Michal Hocko wrote:
> > > > > On Mon 27-05-19 16:12:23, Michal Hocko wrote:
> > > > > > [Cc linux-api. Please always cc this list when proposing a new user
> > > > > > visible api. Keeping the rest of the email intact for reference]
> > > > > >
> > > > > > On Mon 27-05-19 13:05:58, Konstantin Khlebnikov wrote:
> > > > > [...]
> > > > > > > This implements manual kswapd-style memory reclaim initiated by userspace.
> > > > > > > It reclaims both physical memory and cgroup pages. It works in context of
> > > > > > > task who calls syscall madvise thus cpu time is accounted correctly.
> > > > >
> > > > > I do not follow. Does this mean that the madvise always reclaims from
> > > > > the memcg the process is member of?
> > > >
> > > > OK, I've had a quick look at the implementation (the semantic should be
> > > > clear from the patch descrition btw.) and it goes all the way up the
> > > > hierarchy and finally try to impose the same limit to the global state.
> > > > This doesn't really make much sense to me. For few reasons.
> > > >
> > > > First of all it breaks isolation where one subgroup can influence a
> > > > different hierarchy via parent reclaim.
> > >
> > > madvise(NULL, size, MADV_STOCKPILE) is the same as memory allocation and
> > > freeing immediately, but without pinning memory and provoking oom.
> > >
> > > So, there is shouldn't be any isolation or security issues.
> > >
> > > At least probably it should be limited with portion of limit (like half)
> > > instead of whole limit as it does now.
> >
> > I do not think so. If a process is running inside a memcg then it is
> > a subject of a limit and that implies an isolation. What you are
> > proposing here is to allow escaping that restriction unless I am missing
> > something. Just consider the following setup
> >
> > root (total memory = 2G)
> > / \
> > (1G) A B (1G)
> > / \
> > (500M) C D (500M)
> >
> > all of them used up close to the limit and a process inside D requests
> > shrinking to 250M. Unless I am misunderstanding this implementation
> > will shrink D, B root to 250M (which means reclaiming C and A as well)
> > and then globally if that was not sufficient. So you have allowed D to
> > "allocate" 1,75G of memory effectively, right?
>
> It shrinks not 'size' memory - only while usage + size > limit.
> So, after reclaiming 250M in D all other levels will have 250M free.
Could you define the exact semantic? Ideally something for the manual
page please?
--
Michal Hocko
SUSE Labs
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2019-05-28 7:38 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 13+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2019-05-27 10:05 [PATCH RFC] mm/madvise: implement MADV_STOCKPILE (kswapd from user space) Konstantin Khlebnikov
2019-05-27 14:12 ` Michal Hocko
2019-05-27 14:21 ` Michal Hocko
2019-05-27 14:30 ` Konstantin Khlebnikov
2019-05-27 14:39 ` Michal Hocko
2019-05-28 6:25 ` Konstantin Khlebnikov
2019-05-28 6:51 ` Michal Hocko
2019-05-28 7:30 ` Konstantin Khlebnikov
2019-05-28 7:38 ` Michal Hocko [this message]
2019-05-28 8:04 ` Konstantin Khlebnikov
2019-05-28 8:42 ` Michal Hocko
2019-05-28 8:58 ` Konstantin Khlebnikov
2019-05-28 14:56 ` Shakeel Butt
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=20190528073835.GP1658@dhcp22.suse.cz \
--to=mhocko@kernel.org \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=guro@fb.com \
--cc=hannes@cmpxchg.org \
--cc=khlebnikov@yandex-team.ru \
--cc=linux-api@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
--cc=mgorman@techsingularity.net \
--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).