From: Glauber Costa <glommer@parallels.com>
To: Michal Hocko <mhocko@suse.cz>
Cc: <linux-mm@kvack.org>, Pekka Enberg <penberg@kernel.org>,
Cristoph Lameter <cl@linux.com>,
David Rientjes <rientjes@google.com>, <cgroups@vger.kernel.org>,
<devel@openvz.org>, <kamezawa.hiroyu@jp.fujitsu.com>,
<linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
Frederic Weisbecker <fweisbec@gmail.com>,
Suleiman Souhlal <suleiman@google.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 07/25] memcg: Reclaim when more than one page needed.
Date: Mon, 25 Jun 2012 18:04:08 +0400 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <4FE86FD8.6010000@parallels.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <4FE86411.5020708@parallels.com>
[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1918 bytes --]
On 06/25/2012 05:13 PM, Glauber Costa wrote:
>
>>>>> +
>>>>> ret = mem_cgroup_reclaim(mem_over_limit, gfp_mask, flags);
>>>>> if (mem_cgroup_margin(mem_over_limit) >= nr_pages)
>>>>> return CHARGE_RETRY;
>>>>> @@ -2234,8 +2235,10 @@ static int mem_cgroup_do_charge(struct
>>>>> mem_cgroup *memcg, gfp_t gfp_mask,
>>>>> * unlikely to succeed so close to the limit, and we fall back
>>>>> * to regular pages anyway in case of failure.
>>>>> */
>>>>> - if (nr_pages == 1 && ret)
>>>>> + if (nr_pages <= (1 << PAGE_ALLOC_COSTLY_ORDER) && ret) {
>>>>> + cond_resched();
>>>>> return CHARGE_RETRY;
>>>>> + }
>>>>
>>>> What prevents us from looping for unbounded amount of time here?
>>>> Maybe you need to consider the number of reclaimed pages here.
>>>
>>> Why would we even loop here? It will just return CHARGE_RETRY, it is
>>> up to the caller to decide whether or not it will retry.
>>
>> Yes, but the test was original to prevent oom when we managed to reclaim
>> something. And something might be enough for a single page but now you
>> have high order allocations so we can retry without any success.
>>
>
> So,
>
> Most of the kmem allocations are likely to be quite small as well. For
> the slab, we're dealing with the order of 2-3 pages, and for other
> allocations that may happen, like stack, they will be in the order of 2
> pages as well.
>
> So one thing I could do here, is define a threshold, say, 3, and only
> retry for that very low threshold, instead of following COSTLY_ORDER.
> I don't expect two or three pages to be much less likely to be freed
> than a single page.
>
> I am fine with ripping of the cond_resched as well.
>
> Let me know if you would be okay with that.
>
>
For the record, here's the patch I would propose.
At this point, I think it would be nice to Suleiman to say if he is
still okay with the changes.
[-- Attachment #2: 0001-memcg-Reclaim-when-more-than-one-page-needed.patch --]
[-- Type: text/x-patch, Size: 3471 bytes --]
>From 43bb259f5a0e3a73bc76f24d1b42000a95889015 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Suleiman Souhlal <ssouhlal@FreeBSD.org>
Date: Fri, 9 Mar 2012 12:39:08 -0800
Subject: [PATCH] memcg: Reclaim when more than one page needed.
mem_cgroup_do_charge() was written before slab accounting, and expects
three cases: being called for 1 page, being called for a stock of 32 pages,
or being called for a hugepage. If we call for 2 or 3 pages (and several
slabs used in process creation are such, at least with the debug options I
had), it assumed it's being called for stock and just retried without reclaiming.
Fix that by passing down a minsize argument in addition to the csize.
And what to do about that (csize == PAGE_SIZE && ret) retry? If it's
needed at all (and presumably is since it's there, perhaps to handle
races), then it should be extended to more than PAGE_SIZE, yet how far?
And should there be a retry count limit, of what? For now retry up to
COSTLY_ORDER (as page_alloc.c does), stay safe with a cond_resched(),
and make sure not to do it if __GFP_NORETRY.
[v4: fixed nr pages calculation pointed out by Christoph Lameter ]
Signed-off-by: Suleiman Souhlal <suleiman@google.com>
Signed-off-by: Glauber Costa <glommer@parallels.com>
Reviewed-by: Kamezawa Hiroyuki <kamezawa.hiroyu@jp.fujitsu.com>
---
mm/memcontrol.c | 23 ++++++++++++++++-------
1 file changed, 16 insertions(+), 7 deletions(-)
diff --git a/mm/memcontrol.c b/mm/memcontrol.c
index 9304db2..8e601e8 100644
--- a/mm/memcontrol.c
+++ b/mm/memcontrol.c
@@ -2158,8 +2158,16 @@ enum {
CHARGE_OOM_DIE, /* the current is killed because of OOM */
};
+/*
+ * We need a number that is small enough to be likely to have been
+ * reclaimed even under pressure, but not too big to trigger unnecessary
+ * retries
+ */
+#define NR_PAGES_TO_RETRY 2
+
static int mem_cgroup_do_charge(struct mem_cgroup *memcg, gfp_t gfp_mask,
- unsigned int nr_pages, bool oom_check)
+ unsigned int nr_pages, unsigned int min_pages,
+ bool oom_check)
{
unsigned long csize = nr_pages * PAGE_SIZE;
struct mem_cgroup *mem_over_limit;
@@ -2182,18 +2190,18 @@ static int mem_cgroup_do_charge(struct mem_cgroup *memcg, gfp_t gfp_mask,
} else
mem_over_limit = mem_cgroup_from_res_counter(fail_res, res);
/*
- * nr_pages can be either a huge page (HPAGE_PMD_NR), a batch
- * of regular pages (CHARGE_BATCH), or a single regular page (1).
- *
* Never reclaim on behalf of optional batching, retry with a
* single page instead.
*/
- if (nr_pages == CHARGE_BATCH)
+ if (nr_pages > min_pages)
return CHARGE_RETRY;
if (!(gfp_mask & __GFP_WAIT))
return CHARGE_WOULDBLOCK;
+ if (gfp_mask & __GFP_NORETRY)
+ return CHARGE_NOMEM;
+
ret = mem_cgroup_reclaim(mem_over_limit, gfp_mask, flags);
if (mem_cgroup_margin(mem_over_limit) >= nr_pages)
return CHARGE_RETRY;
@@ -2206,7 +2214,7 @@ static int mem_cgroup_do_charge(struct mem_cgroup *memcg, gfp_t gfp_mask,
* unlikely to succeed so close to the limit, and we fall back
* to regular pages anyway in case of failure.
*/
- if (nr_pages == 1 && ret)
+ if (nr_pages <= NR_PAGES_TO_RETRY && ret)
return CHARGE_RETRY;
/*
@@ -2341,7 +2349,8 @@ again:
nr_oom_retries = MEM_CGROUP_RECLAIM_RETRIES;
}
- ret = mem_cgroup_do_charge(memcg, gfp_mask, batch, oom_check);
+ ret = mem_cgroup_do_charge(memcg, gfp_mask, batch, nr_pages,
+ oom_check);
switch (ret) {
case CHARGE_OK:
break;
--
1.7.10.2
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2012-06-25 14:06 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 59+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2012-06-18 10:27 [PATCH v4 00/25] kmem limitation for memcg Glauber Costa
2012-06-18 10:27 ` [PATCH v4 01/25] slab: rename gfpflags to allocflags Glauber Costa
2012-06-18 10:27 ` [PATCH v4 02/25] provide a common place for initcall processing in kmem_cache Glauber Costa
2012-06-18 10:27 ` [PATCH v4 03/25] slab: move FULL state transition to an initcall Glauber Costa
2012-06-18 10:27 ` [PATCH v4 04/25] Wipe out CFLGS_OFF_SLAB from flags during initial slab creation Glauber Costa
2012-06-18 10:27 ` [PATCH v4 05/25] memcg: Always free struct memcg through schedule_work() Glauber Costa
2012-06-18 12:07 ` Kamezawa Hiroyuki
2012-06-18 12:10 ` Glauber Costa
2012-06-19 0:11 ` Kamezawa Hiroyuki
2012-06-20 7:32 ` Pekka Enberg
2012-06-20 8:40 ` Glauber Costa
2012-06-21 11:39 ` Kamezawa Hiroyuki
2012-06-20 13:20 ` Michal Hocko
2012-06-18 10:27 ` [PATCH v4 06/25] memcg: Make it possible to use the stock for more than one page Glauber Costa
2012-06-20 13:28 ` Michal Hocko
2012-06-20 19:36 ` Glauber Costa
2012-06-21 21:14 ` Michal Hocko
2012-06-25 13:03 ` Glauber Costa
2012-06-18 10:28 ` [PATCH v4 07/25] memcg: Reclaim when more than one page needed Glauber Costa
2012-06-20 13:47 ` Michal Hocko
2012-06-20 19:43 ` Glauber Costa
2012-06-21 21:19 ` Michal Hocko
2012-06-25 13:13 ` Glauber Costa
2012-06-25 14:04 ` Glauber Costa [this message]
2012-06-18 10:28 ` [PATCH v4 08/25] memcg: change defines to an enum Glauber Costa
2012-06-20 13:13 ` Michal Hocko
2012-06-18 10:28 ` [PATCH v4 09/25] kmem slab accounting basic infrastructure Glauber Costa
2012-06-18 10:28 ` [PATCH v4 10/25] slab/slub: struct memcg_params Glauber Costa
2012-06-18 10:28 ` [PATCH v4 11/25] consider a memcg parameter in kmem_create_cache Glauber Costa
2012-06-18 10:28 ` [PATCH v4 12/25] sl[au]b: always get the cache from its page in kfree Glauber Costa
2012-06-18 10:28 ` [PATCH v4 13/25] Add a __GFP_SLABMEMCG flag Glauber Costa
2012-06-18 10:28 ` [PATCH v4 14/25] memcg: kmem controller dispatch infrastructure Glauber Costa
2012-06-18 10:28 ` [PATCH v4 15/25] allow enable_cpu_cache to use preset values for its tunables Glauber Costa
2012-06-18 10:28 ` [PATCH v4 16/25] don't do __ClearPageSlab before freeing slab page Glauber Costa
2012-06-18 10:28 ` [PATCH v4 17/25] skip memcg kmem allocations in specified code regions Glauber Costa
2012-06-18 12:19 ` Kamezawa Hiroyuki
2012-06-18 10:28 ` [PATCH v4 18/25] mm: Allocate kernel pages to the right memcg Glauber Costa
2012-06-18 10:28 ` [PATCH v4 19/25] memcg: disable kmem code when not in use Glauber Costa
2012-06-18 12:22 ` Kamezawa Hiroyuki
2012-06-18 12:26 ` Glauber Costa
2012-06-18 10:28 ` [PATCH v4 20/25] memcg: destroy memcg caches Glauber Costa
2012-06-18 10:28 ` [PATCH v4 21/25] Track all the memcg children of a kmem_cache Glauber Costa
2012-06-18 10:28 ` [PATCH v4 22/25] slab: slab-specific propagation changes Glauber Costa
2012-06-18 10:28 ` [PATCH v4 23/25] memcg: propagate kmem limiting information to children Glauber Costa
2012-06-18 12:37 ` Kamezawa Hiroyuki
2012-06-18 12:43 ` Glauber Costa
2012-06-19 0:16 ` Kamezawa Hiroyuki
2012-06-19 8:35 ` Glauber Costa
2012-06-19 8:54 ` Glauber Costa
2012-06-20 8:59 ` Glauber Costa
2012-06-23 4:19 ` Kamezawa Hiroyuki
2012-06-18 10:28 ` [PATCH v4 24/25] memcg/slub: shrink dead caches Glauber Costa
2012-07-06 15:16 ` Christoph Lameter
2012-07-20 22:16 ` Glauber Costa
2012-07-25 15:23 ` Christoph Lameter
2012-07-25 18:15 ` Glauber Costa
2012-06-18 10:28 ` [PATCH v4 25/25] Documentation: add documentation for slab tracker for memcg Glauber Costa
2012-06-18 12:10 ` [PATCH v4 00/25] kmem limitation " Kamezawa Hiroyuki
2012-06-18 12:14 ` Glauber Costa
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=4FE86FD8.6010000@parallels.com \
--to=glommer@parallels.com \
--cc=cgroups@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=cl@linux.com \
--cc=devel@openvz.org \
--cc=fweisbec@gmail.com \
--cc=kamezawa.hiroyu@jp.fujitsu.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
--cc=mhocko@suse.cz \
--cc=penberg@kernel.org \
--cc=rientjes@google.com \
--cc=suleiman@google.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).