From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-14.6 required=3.0 tests=DKIM_SIGNED,DKIM_VALID, DKIM_VALID_AU,HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,INCLUDES_PATCH,MAILING_LIST_MULTI, SIGNED_OFF_BY,SPF_PASS,URIBL_BLOCKED,USER_IN_DEF_DKIM_WL autolearn=unavailable autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2716AC10F00 for ; Wed, 27 Mar 2019 22:30:02 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [209.132.180.67]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id E749221738 for ; Wed, 27 Mar 2019 22:30:01 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=google.com header.i=@google.com header.b="aaHOcKbm" Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1730973AbfC0WaA (ORCPT ); Wed, 27 Mar 2019 18:30:00 -0400 Received: from mail-it1-f194.google.com ([209.85.166.194]:36592 "EHLO mail-it1-f194.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1728116AbfC0W37 (ORCPT ); Wed, 27 Mar 2019 18:29:59 -0400 Received: by mail-it1-f194.google.com with SMTP id h9so2917643itl.1 for ; Wed, 27 Mar 2019 15:29:59 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=google.com; s=20161025; h=mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=vb2BrBH4oYQzGEnJbFomSh/8BX3FsNmxH+IKvRIF5+g=; b=aaHOcKbm5Wc46HDgM0FNGAZSYg9x419T2E4bP/s3ZwTQLA9ox/5uOx2GUg/90BNxUW M2CKIwOqOdGMqbRA5XNTOz2kS8EGFKgjQDK1hg7Jd3PcPXTqc6U8nbIweLaYifp0OEeZ O9xVFdcDEc6GJDMcS7uAiBs+ciCYga8pyBIUdE0oRC15/Uzh9sOxl3aNDI65KAnA6Lhl 29F7vhGLOooseb0bAFP1tLmTc8mJ4dDNv3yGDnhNApFuB1df+TWZ6Ni1Tum3JYVMtwuP fWN/9v6axFdkX3QeS9QwpCiTnlKk3dSD3dGU0YqoHnYGdkxDPP1zxiG0zBKmrT0oRbH3 1/MA== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=vb2BrBH4oYQzGEnJbFomSh/8BX3FsNmxH+IKvRIF5+g=; b=H7oZX+XpQcXnqs0kv6U+aJ/lTGZlFY/f8yMnYK00q2ud88448ouNEq/WmJDgvB+c92 NdxWzdWqdXOe/Fuh3tjRRdcBN/YKmkO0GmU0VhqeeBWob418jX2dd1mVYVYH+9+zWItQ uVPRyjP0OPAa4r73XuKzouAOgA3wa6u/xH17+4P2BzOPlA2CktnBABNEDe6anCvJXcLI PFGqQkKLLHYTqafiVRPFMvwBHxij/D2F9GXvpNy41J3JTCwuoJyRfX71zDTkxRE1lbso nKOsF2g7Pk6oynqO9V1HlrgKVbEu3Gh4b9XCJZcpebewYJK+ZWIwGIxdFDDYeYaBi1sw QgwQ== X-Gm-Message-State: APjAAAXh+paxDeFo+VZ3QOG6QpZgEpooYAZxX3my07H0K9/+aG5usj3I MOGN8G26UjjIGLX8mFCLEQIeyR86HZNWVlXMTm686A== X-Google-Smtp-Source: APXvYqwbULKznaKem+4hXQUdPX78evLmKmtf4Atst3mQOe19/U0Y/XdBnE+P0iiiSkUWIKDzxNN/KlZIjlos60rc5eM= X-Received: by 2002:a05:660c:9c3:: with SMTP id i3mr4960093itl.168.1553725798322; Wed, 27 Mar 2019 15:29:58 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <20190307165632.35810-1-gthelen@google.com> <20190322181517.GA12378@tower.DHCP.thefacebook.com> In-Reply-To: <20190322181517.GA12378@tower.DHCP.thefacebook.com> From: Greg Thelen Date: Wed, 27 Mar 2019 15:29:47 -0700 Message-ID: Subject: Re: [PATCH] writeback: sum memcg dirty counters as needed To: Roman Gushchin Cc: Andrew Morton , Johannes Weiner , Michal Hocko , Vladimir Davydov , Tejun Heo , "linux-mm@kvack.org" , "linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Fri, Mar 22, 2019 at 11:15 AM Roman Gushchin wrote: > > On Thu, Mar 07, 2019 at 08:56:32AM -0800, Greg Thelen wrote: > > Since commit a983b5ebee57 ("mm: memcontrol: fix excessive complexity in > > memory.stat reporting") memcg dirty and writeback counters are managed > > as: > > 1) per-memcg per-cpu values in range of [-32..32] > > 2) per-memcg atomic counter > > When a per-cpu counter cannot fit in [-32..32] it's flushed to the > > atomic. Stat readers only check the atomic. > > Thus readers such as balance_dirty_pages() may see a nontrivial error > > margin: 32 pages per cpu. > > Assuming 100 cpus: > > 4k x86 page_size: 13 MiB error per memcg > > 64k ppc page_size: 200 MiB error per memcg > > Considering that dirty+writeback are used together for some decisions > > the errors double. > > > > This inaccuracy can lead to undeserved oom kills. One nasty case is > > when all per-cpu counters hold positive values offsetting an atomic > > negative value (i.e. per_cpu[*]=32, atomic=n_cpu*-32). > > balance_dirty_pages() only consults the atomic and does not consider > > throttling the next n_cpu*32 dirty pages. If the file_lru is in the > > 13..200 MiB range then there's absolutely no dirty throttling, which > > burdens vmscan with only dirty+writeback pages thus resorting to oom > > kill. > > > > It could be argued that tiny containers are not supported, but it's more > > subtle. It's the amount the space available for file lru that matters. > > If a container has memory.max-200MiB of non reclaimable memory, then it > > will also suffer such oom kills on a 100 cpu machine. > > > > The following test reliably ooms without this patch. This patch avoids > > oom kills. > > > > ... > > > > Make balance_dirty_pages() and wb_over_bg_thresh() work harder to > > collect exact per memcg counters when a memcg is close to the > > throttling/writeback threshold. This avoids the aforementioned oom > > kills. > > > > This does not affect the overhead of memory.stat, which still reads the > > single atomic counter. > > > > Why not use percpu_counter? memcg already handles cpus going offline, > > so no need for that overhead from percpu_counter. And the > > percpu_counter spinlocks are more heavyweight than is required. > > > > It probably also makes sense to include exact dirty and writeback > > counters in memcg oom reports. But that is saved for later. > > > > Signed-off-by: Greg Thelen > > --- > > include/linux/memcontrol.h | 33 +++++++++++++++++++++++++-------- > > mm/memcontrol.c | 26 ++++++++++++++++++++------ > > mm/page-writeback.c | 27 +++++++++++++++++++++------ > > 3 files changed, 66 insertions(+), 20 deletions(-) > > > > diff --git a/include/linux/memcontrol.h b/include/linux/memcontrol.h > > index 83ae11cbd12c..6a133c90138c 100644 > > --- a/include/linux/memcontrol.h > > +++ b/include/linux/memcontrol.h > > @@ -573,6 +573,22 @@ static inline unsigned long memcg_page_state(struct mem_cgroup *memcg, > > return x; > > } > > Hi Greg! > > Thank you for the patch, definitely a good problem to be fixed! > > > > > +/* idx can be of type enum memcg_stat_item or node_stat_item */ > > +static inline unsigned long > > +memcg_exact_page_state(struct mem_cgroup *memcg, int idx) > > +{ > > + long x = atomic_long_read(&memcg->stat[idx]); > > +#ifdef CONFIG_SMP > > I doubt that this #ifdef is correct without corresponding changes > in __mod_memcg_state(). As now, we do use per-cpu buffer which spills > to an atomic value event if !CONFIG_SMP. It's probably something > that we want to change, but as now, #ifdef CONFIG_SMP should protect > only "if (x < 0)" part. Ack. I'll fix it. > > + int cpu; > > + > > + for_each_online_cpu(cpu) > > + x += per_cpu_ptr(memcg->stat_cpu, cpu)->count[idx]; > > + if (x < 0) > > + x = 0; > > +#endif > > + return x; > > +} > > Also, isn't it worth it to generalize memcg_page_state() instead? > By adding an bool exact argument? I believe dirty balance is not > the only place, where we need a better accuracy. Nod. I'll provide a more general version of memcg_page_state(). I'm testing updated (forthcoming v2) patch set now with feedback from Andrew and Roman.