- 02 Apr, 2020 40 commits
-
-
Wang Wenhu authored
The param "start" actually referes to the physical memory start, which is to be mapped into virtual area vma. And it is the field vma->vm_start which stands for the start of the area. Most of the time, we do not read through whole implementation of a function but only the definition and essential comments. Accurate comments are definitely the base stone. Signed-off-by:
Wang Wenhu <wenhu.wang@vivo.com> Signed-off-by:
Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org> Reviewed-by:
Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
-
WANG Wenhu authored
It really made me scratch my head. Replace the comment with an accurate and consistent description. The parameter pfn actually refers to the page frame number which is right-shifted by PAGE_SHIFT from the physical address. Signed-off-by:
-
Peter Xu authored
Userfaultfd fault path was by default killable even if the caller does not have FAULT_FLAG_KILLABLE. That makes sense before in that when with gup we don't have FAULT_FLAG_KILLABLE properly set before. Now after previous patch we've got FAULT_FLAG_KILLABLE applied even for gup code so it should also make sense to let userfaultfd to honor the FAULT_FLAG_KILLABLE. Because we're unconditionally setting FAULT_FLAG_KILLABLE in gup code right now, this patch should have no functional change. It also cleaned the code a little bit by introducing some helpers. Signed-off-by:
Peter Xu <peterx@redhat.com> Signed-off-by:
Brian Geffon <bgeffon@google.com> Cc: Andrea Arcangeli <aarcange@redhat.com> Cc: Bobby Powers <bobbypowers@gmail.com> Cc: David Hildenbrand <david@redhat.com> Cc: Denis Plotnikov <dplotnikov@virtuozzo.com> Cc: "Dr . David Alan Gilbert" <dgilbert@redhat.com> Cc: Hugh Dickins <hughd@google.com> Cc: Jerome Glisse <jglisse@redhat.com> Cc: Johannes Weiner <hannes@cmpxchg.org> Cc: "Kirill A . Shutemov" <kirill@shutemov.name> Cc: Martin Cracauer <cracauer@cons.org> Cc: Marty McFadden <mcfadden8@llnl.gov> Cc: Matthew Wilcox <willy@infradead.org> Cc: Maya Gokhale <gokhale2@llnl.gov> Cc: Mel Gorman <mgorman@suse.de> Cc: Mike Kravetz <mike.kravetz@oracle.com> Cc: Mike Rapoport <rppt@linux.vnet.ibm.com> Cc: Pavel Emelyanov <xemul@openvz.org> Link: http://lkml.kernel.org/r/20200220160300.9941-1-peterx@redhat.comSigned-off-by:
-
Peter Xu authored
The existing gup code does not react to the fatal signals in many code paths. For example, in one retry path of gup we're still using down_read() rather than down_read_killable(). Also, when doing page faults we don't pass in FAULT_FLAG_KILLABLE as well, which means that within the faulting process we'll wait in non-killable way as well. These were spotted by Linus during the code review of some other patches. Let's allow the gup code to react to fatal signals to improve the responsiveness of threads when during gup and being killed. Signed-off-by:
-
Peter Xu authored
This is the gup counterpart of the change that allows the VM_FAULT_RETRY to happen for more than once. One thing to mention is that we must check the fatal signal here before retry because the GUP can be interrupted by that, otherwise we can loop forever. Signed-off-by:
-
Peter Xu authored
The idea comes from a discussion between Linus and Andrea [1]. Before this patch we only allow a page fault to retry once. We achieved this by clearing the FAULT_FLAG_ALLOW_RETRY flag when doing handle_mm_fault() the second time. This was majorly used to avoid unexpected starvation of the system by looping over forever to handle the page fault on a single page. However that should hardly happen, and after all for each code path to return a VM_FAULT_RETRY we'll first wait for a condition (during which time we should possibly yield the cpu) to happen before VM_FAULT_RETRY is really returned. This patch removes the restriction by keeping the FAULT_FLAG_ALLOW_RETRY flag when we receive VM_FAULT_RETRY. It means that the page fault handler now can retry the page fault for multiple times if necessary without the need to generate another page fault event. Meanwhile we still keep the FAULT_FLAG_TRIED flag so page fault handler can still identify whether a page fault is the first attempt or not. Then we'll have these combinations of fault flags (only considering ALLOW_RETRY flag and TRIED flag): - ALLOW_RETRY and !TRIED: this means the page fault allows to retry, and this is the first try - ALLOW_RETRY and TRIED: this means the page fault allows to retry, and this is not the first try - !ALLOW_RETRY and !TRIED: this means the page fault does not allow to retry at all - !ALLOW_RETRY and TRIED: this is forbidden and should never be used In existing code we have multiple places that has taken special care of the first condition above by checking against (fault_flags & FAULT_FLAG_ALLOW_RETRY). This patch introduces a simple helper to detect the first retry of a page fault by checking against both (fault_flags & FAULT_FLAG_ALLOW_RETRY) and !(fault_flag & FAULT_FLAG_TRIED) because now even the 2nd try will have the ALLOW_RETRY set, then use that helper in all existing special paths. One example is in __lock_page_or_retry(), now we'll drop the mmap_sem only in the first attempt of page fault and we'll keep it in follow up retries, so old locking behavior will be retained. This will be a nice enhancement for current code [2] at the same time a supporting material for the future userfaultfd-writeprotect work, since in that work there will always be an explicit userfault writeprotect retry for protected pages, and if that cannot resolve the page fault (e.g., when userfaultfd-writeprotect is used in conjunction with swapped pages) then we'll possibly need a 3rd retry of the page fault. It might also benefit other potential users who will have similar requirement like userfault write-protection. GUP code is not touched yet and will be covered in follow up patch. Please read the thread below for more information. [1] https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/20171102193644.GB22686@redhat.com/ [2] https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/20181230154648.GB9832@redhat.com/Suggested-by:Andrea Arcangeli <aarcange@redhat.com> Signed-off-by:
-
Peter Xu authored
handle_userfaultfd() is currently the only one place in the kernel page fault procedures that can respond to non-fatal userspace signals. It was trying to detect such an allowance by checking against USER & KILLABLE flags, which was "un-official". In this patch, we introduced a new flag (FAULT_FLAG_INTERRUPTIBLE) to show that the fault handler allows the fault procedure to respond even to non-fatal signals. Meanwhile, add this new flag to the default fault flags so that all the page fault handlers can benefit from the new flag. With that, replacing the userfault check to this one. Since the line is getting even longer, clean up the fault flags a bit too to ease TTY users. Although we've got a new flag and applied it, we shouldn't have any functional change with this patch so far. Suggested-by:
David Hildenbrand <david@redhat.com> Cc: Andrea Arcangeli <aarcange@redhat.com> Cc: Bobby Powers <bobbypowers@gmail.com> Cc: Denis Plotnikov <dplotnikov@virtuozzo.com> Cc: "Dr . David Alan Gilbert" <dgilbert@redhat.com> Cc: Hugh Dickins <hughd@google.com> Cc: Jerome Glisse <jglisse@redhat.com> Cc: Johannes Weiner <hannes@cmpxchg.org> Cc: "Kirill A . Shutemov" <kirill@shutemov.name> Cc: Martin Cracauer <cracauer@cons.org> Cc: Marty McFadden <mcfadden8@llnl.gov> Cc: Matthew Wilcox <willy@infradead.org> Cc: Maya Gokhale <gokhale2@llnl.gov> Cc: Mel Gorman <mgorman@suse.de> Cc: Mike Kravetz <mike.kravetz@oracle.com> Cc: Mike Rapoport <rppt@linux.vnet.ibm.com> Cc: Pavel Emelyanov <xemul@openvz.org> Link: http://lkml.kernel.org/r/20200220195348.16302-1-peterx@redhat.comSigned-off-by:
-
Peter Xu authored
Although there're tons of arch-specific page fault handlers, most of them are still sharing the same initial value of the page fault flags. Say, merely all of the page fault handlers would allow the fault to be retried, and they also allow the fault to respond to SIGKILL. Let's define a default value for the fault flags to replace those initial page fault flags that were copied over. With this, it'll be far easier to introduce new fault flag that can be used by all the architectures instead of touching all the archs. Signed-off-by:
-
Peter Xu authored
This patch removes the risk path in handle_userfault() then we will be sure that the callers of handle_mm_fault() will know that the VMAs might have changed. Meanwhile with previous patch we don't lose responsiveness as well since the core mm code now can handle the nonfatal userspace signals even if we return VM_FAULT_RETRY. Suggested-by:
Jerome Glisse <jglisse@redhat.com> Cc: Bobby Powers <bobbypowers@gmail.com> Cc: David Hildenbrand <david@redhat.com> Cc: Denis Plotnikov <dplotnikov@virtuozzo.com> Cc: "Dr . David Alan Gilbert" <dgilbert@redhat.com> Cc: Hugh Dickins <hughd@google.com> Cc: Johannes Weiner <hannes@cmpxchg.org> Cc: "Kirill A . Shutemov" <kirill@shutemov.name> Cc: Martin Cracauer <cracauer@cons.org> Cc: Marty McFadden <mcfadden8@llnl.gov> Cc: Matthew Wilcox <willy@infradead.org> Cc: Maya Gokhale <gokhale2@llnl.gov> Cc: Mel Gorman <mgorman@suse.de> Cc: Mike Kravetz <mike.kravetz@oracle.com> Cc: Mike Rapoport <rppt@linux.vnet.ibm.com> Cc: Pavel Emelyanov <xemul@openvz.org> Link: http://lkml.kernel.org/r/20200220160234.9646-1-peterx@redhat.comSigned-off-by:
-
Peter Xu authored
The idea comes from the upstream discussion between Linus and Andrea: https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/20171102193644.GB22686@redhat.com/ A summary to the issue: there was a special path in handle_userfault() in the past that we'll return a VM_FAULT_NOPAGE when we detected non-fatal signals when waiting for userfault handling. We did that by reacquiring the mmap_sem before returning. However that brings a risk in that the vmas might have changed when we retake the mmap_sem and even we could be holding an invalid vma structure. This patch is a preparation of removing that special path by allowing the page fault to return even faster if we were interrupted by a non-fatal signal during a user-mode page fault handling routine. Suggested-by:
-
Peter Xu authored
Let SH to use the new fault_signal_pending() helper. Here we'll need to move the up_read() out because that's actually needed as long as !RETRY cases. At the meantime we can drop all the rest of up_read()s now (which seems to be cleaner). Signed-off-by:
-
Peter Xu authored
Let powerpc code to use the new helper, by moving the signal handling earlier before the retry logic. Signed-off-by:
-
Peter Xu authored
Let the arm64 fault handling to use the new fault_signal_pending() helper, by moving the signal handling out of the retry logic. Signed-off-by:
-
Peter Xu authored
Let ARC to use the new helper fault_signal_pending() by moving the signal check out of the retry logic as standalone. This should also helps to simplify the code a bit. Signed-off-by:
-
Peter Xu authored
Let's move the fatal signal check even earlier so that we can directly use the new fault_signal_pending() in x86 mm code. Signed-off-by:
-
Peter Xu authored
For most architectures, we've got a quick path to detect fatal signal after a handle_mm_fault(). Introduce a helper for that quick path. It cleans the current codes a bit so we don't need to duplicate the same check across archs. More importantly, this will be an unified place that we handle the signal immediately right after an interrupted page fault, so it'll be much easier for us if we want to change the behavior of handling signals later on for all the archs. Note that currently only part of the archs are using this new helper, because some archs have their own way to handle signals. In the follow up patches, we'll try to apply this helper to all the rest of archs. Another note is that the "regs" parameter in the new helper is not used yet. It'll be used very soon. Now we kept it in this patch only to avoid touching all the archs again in the follow up patches. [peterx@redhat.com: fix sparse warnings] Link: http://lkml.kernel.org/r/20200311145921.GD479302@xz-x1Signed-off-by:
-
Peter Xu authored
When follow_hugetlb_page() returns with *locked==0, it means we've got a VM_FAULT_RETRY within the fauling process and we've released the mmap_sem. When that happens, we should stop and bail out. Signed-off-by:
-
Peter Xu authored
Patch series "mm: Page fault enhancements", v6. This series contains cleanups and enhancements to current page fault logic. The whole idea comes from the discussion between Andrea and Linus on the bug reported by syzbot here: https://lkml.org/lkml/2017/11/2/833 Basically it does two things: (a) Allows the page fault logic to be more interactive on not only SIGKILL, but also the rest of userspace signals, and, (b) Allows the page fault retry (VM_FAULT_RETRY) to happen for more than once. For (a): with the changes we should be able to react faster when page faults are working in parallel with userspace signals like SIGSTOP and SIGCONT (and more), and with that we can remove the buggy part in userfaultfd and benefit the whole page fault mechanism on faster signal processing to reach the userspace. For (b), we should be able to allow the page fault handler to loop for even more than twice. Some context: for now since we have FAULT_FLAG_ALLOW_RETRY we can allow to retry the page fault once with the same interrupt context, however never more than twice. This can be not only a potential cleanup to remove this assumption since AFAIU the code itself doesn't really have this twice-only limitation (though that should be a protective approach in the past), at the same time it'll greatly simplify future works like userfaultfd write-protect where it's possible to retry for more than twice (please have a look at [1] below for a possible user that might require the page fault to be handled for a third time; if we can remove the retry limitation we can simply drop that patch and those complexity). This patch (of 16): There's plenty of places around __get_user_pages() that has a parameter "nonblocking" which does not really mean that "it won't block" (because it can really block) but instead it shows whether the mmap_sem is released by up_read() during the page fault handling mostly when VM_FAULT_RETRY is returned. We have the correct naming in e.g. get_user_pages_locked() or get_user_pages_remote() as "locked", however there're still many places that are using the "nonblocking" as name. Renaming the places to "locked" where proper to better suite the functionality of the variable. While at it, fixing up some of the comments accordingly. Signed-off-by:
Mike Rapoport <rppt@linux.vnet.ibm.com> Reviewed-by:
-
Matthew Wilcox (Oracle) authored
The documentation currently does not include the deathless prose written to describe functions in pagemap.h because it's not included in any rst file. Fix up the mismatches between parameter names and the documentation and add the file to mm-api. Signed-off-by:
Matthew Wilcox (Oracle) <willy@infradead.org> Signed-off-by:
Zi Yan <ziy@nvidia.com> Reviewed-by:
John Hubbard <jhubbard@nvidia.com> Cc: Jonathan Corbet <corbet@lwn.net> Link: http://lkml.kernel.org/r/20200221220045.24989-1-willy@infradead.orgSigned-off-by:
-
Anshuman Khandual authored
Currently the declaration and definition for is_vma_temporary_stack() are scattered. Lets make is_vma_temporary_stack() helper available for general use and also drop the declaration from (include/linux/huge_mm.h) which is no longer required. While at this, rename this as vma_is_temporary_stack() in line with existing helpers. This should not cause any functional change. Signed-off-by:
Anshuman Khandual <anshuman.khandual@arm.com> Signed-off-by:
Vlastimil Babka <vbabka@suse.cz> Cc: Ingo Molnar <mingo@redhat.com> Cc: Michael Ellerman <mpe@ellerman.id.au> Cc: Paul Mackerras <paulus@samba.org> Cc: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de> Link: http://lkml.kernel.org/r/1582782965-3274-4-git-send-email-anshuman.khandual@arm.comSigned-off-by:
-
Anshuman Khandual authored
Idea of a foreign VMA with respect to the present context is very generic. But currently there are two identical definitions for this in powerpc and x86 platforms. Lets consolidate those redundant definitions while making vma_is_foreign() available for general use later. This should not cause any functional change. Signed-off-by:
-
Anshuman Khandual authored
Patch series "mm/vma: some more minor changes", v2. The motivation here is to consolidate VMA flags and helpers in generic memory header and reduce code duplication when ever applicable. If there are other possible similar instances which might be missing here, please do let me me know. I will be happy to incorporate them. This patch (of 3): Move VM_NO_KHUGEPAGED into generic header (include/linux/mm.h). This just makes sure that no VMA flag is scattered in individual function files any longer. While at this, fix an old comment which is no longer valid. This should not cause any functional change. Signed-off-by:
-
Thomas Hellstrom authored
Following the update of pagewalk code commit a07984d48146 ("mm: pagewalk: add p4d_entry() and pgd_entry()") we can modify the mapping_dirty_helpers' huge page-table entry callbacks to avoid splitting when a huge pud or -pmd is encountered. Signed-off-by:Thomas Hellstrom <thellstrom@vmware.com> Signed-off-by:
Steven Price <steven.price@arm.com> Cc: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org> Link: http://lkml.kernel.org/r/20200203154305.15045-1-thomas_os@shipmail.orgSigned-off-by:
-
Roman Gushchin authored
If a task is getting moved out of the OOMing cgroup, it might result in unexpected OOM killings if memory.oom.group is used anywhere in the cgroup tree. Imagine the following example: A (oom.group = 1) / \ (OOM) B C Let's say B's memory.max is exceeded and it's OOMing. The OOM killer selects a task in B as a victim, but someone asynchronously moves the task into C. mem_cgroup_get_oom_group() will iterate over all ancestors of C up to the root cgroup. In theory it had to stop at the oom_domain level - the memory cgroup which is OOMing. But because B is not an ancestor of C, it's not happening. Instead it chooses A (because it's oom.group is set), and kills all tasks in A. This behavior is wrong because the OOM happened in B, so there is no reason to kill anything outside. Fix this by checking it the memory cgroup to which the task belongs is a descendant of the oom_domain. If not, memory.oom.group should be ignored, and the OOM killer should kill only the victim task. Reported-by:Dan Schatzberg <dschatzberg@fb.com> Signed-off-by:
Roman Gushchin <guro@fb.com> Signed-off-by:
Michal Hocko <mhocko@suse.com> Acked-by:
Johannes Weiner <hannes@cmpxchg.org> Link: http://lkml.kernel.org/r/20200316223510.3176148-1-guro@fb.comSigned-off-by:
-
Chris Down authored
The read side of this is all protected, but we can still tear if multiple iterations of mem_cgroup_protected are going at the same time. There's some intentional racing in mem_cgroup_protected which is ok, but load/store tearing should be avoided. Signed-off-by:
Chris Down <chris@chrisdown.name> Signed-off-by:
-
Chris Down authored
The write side of this is xchg()/smp_mb(), so that's all good. Just a few sites missing a READ_ONCE. Signed-off-by:
-
Chris Down authored
This can be set concurrently with reads, which may cause the wrong value to be propagated. Signed-off-by:
-
Chris Down authored
This can be set concurrently with reads, which may cause the wrong value to be propagated. Signed-off-by:
-
Chris Down authored
This one is a bit more nuanced because we have memcg_max_mutex, which is mostly just used for enforcing invariants, but we still need to READ_ONCE since (despite its name) it doesn't really protect memory.max access. On write (page_counter_set_max() and memory_max_write()) we use xchg(), which uses smp_mb(), so that's already fine. Signed-off-by:
-
Chris Down authored
A mem_cgroup's high attribute can be concurrently set at the same time as we are trying to read it -- for example, if we are in memory_high_write at the same time as we are trying to do high reclaim. Signed-off-by:
-
Vincenzo Frascino authored
mem_cgroup_id_get_many() is currently used only when MMU or MEMCG_SWAP configuration options are enabled. Having them disabled triggers the following warning at compile time: linux/mm/memcontrol.c:4797:13: warning: `mem_cgroup_id_get_many' defined but not used [-Wunused-function] static void mem_cgroup_id_get_many(struct mem_cgroup *memcg, unsigned int n) Make mem_cgroup_id_get_many() __maybe_unused to address the issue. Signed-off-by:
Vincenzo Frascino <vincenzo.frascino@arm.com> Signed-off-by:
-
Shakeel Butt authored
Currently multiple locations in memcg code, css_tryget_online() is being used. However it doesn't matter whether the cgroup is online for the callers. Online used to matter when we had reparenting on offlining and we needed a way to prevent new ones from showing up. The failure case for couple of these css_tryget_online usage is to fallback to root_mem_cgroup which kind of make bypassing the memcg limits possible for some workloads. For example creating an inotify group in a subcontainer and then deleting that container after moving the process to a different container will make all the event objects allocated for that group to the root_mem_cgroup. So, using css_tryget_online() is dangerous for such cases. Two locations still use the online version. The swapin of offlined memcg's pages and the memcg kmem cache creation. The kmem cache indeed needs the online version as the kernel does the reparenting of memcg kmem caches. For the swapin case, it has been left for later as the fallback is not really that concerning. With swap accounting enabled, if the memcg of the swapped out page is not online then the memcg extracted from the given 'mm' will be charged and if 'mm' is NULL then root memcg will be charged. However I could not find a code path where the given 'mm' will be NULL for swap-in case. Signed-off-by:
Shakeel Butt <shakeelb@google.com> Signed-off-by:
-
Johannes Weiner authored
Right now, the effective protection of any given cgroup is capped by its own explicit memory.low setting, regardless of what the parent says. The reasons for this are mostly historical and ease of implementation: to make delegation of memory.low safe, effective protection is the min() of all memory.low up the tree. Unfortunately, this limitation makes it impossible to protect an entire subtree from another without forcing the user to make explicit protection allocations all the way to the leaf cgroups - something that is highly undesirable in real life scenarios. Consider memory in a data center host. At the cgroup top level, we have a distinction between system management software and the actual workload the system is executing. Both branches are further subdivided into individual services, job components etc. We want to protect the workload as a whole from the system management software, but that doesn't mean we want to protect and prioritize individual workload wrt each other. Their memory demand can vary over time, and we'd want the VM to simply cache the hottest data within the workload subtree. Yet, the current memory.low limitations force us to allocate a fixed amount of protection to each workload component in order to get protection from system management software in general. This results in very inefficient resource distribution. Another concern with mandating downward allocation is that, as the complexity of the cgroup tree grows, it gets harder for the lower levels to be informed about decisions made at the host-level. Consider a container inside a namespace that in turn creates its own nested tree of cgroups to run multiple workloads. It'd be extremely difficult to configure memory.low parameters in those leaf cgroups that on one hand balance pressure among siblings as the container desires, while also reflecting the host-level protection from e.g. rpm upgrades, that lie beyond one or more delegation and namespacing points in the tree. It's highly unusual from a cgroup interface POV that nested levels have to be aware of and reflect decisions made at higher levels for them to be effective. To enable such use cases and scale configurability for complex trees, this patch implements a resource inheritance model for memory that is similar to how the CPU and the IO controller implement work-conserving resource allocations: a share of a resource allocated to a subree always applies to the entire subtree recursively, while allowing, but not mandating, children to further specify distribution rules. That means that if protection is explicitly allocated among siblings, those configured shares are being followed during page reclaim just like they are now. However, if the memory.low set at a higher level is not fully claimed by the children in that subtree, the "floating" remainder is applied to each cgroup in the tree in proportion to its size. Since reclaim pressure is applied in proportion to size as well, each child in that tree gets the same boost, and the effect is neutral among siblings - with respect to each other, they behave as if no memory control was enabled at all, and the VM simply balances the memory demands optimally within the subtree. But collectively those cgroups enjoy a boost over the cgroups in neighboring trees. E.g. a leaf cgroup with a memory.low setting of 0 no longer means that it's not getting a share of the hierarchically assigned resource, just that it doesn't claim a fixed amount of it to protect from its siblings. This allows us to recursively protect one subtree (workload) from another (system management), while letting subgroups compete freely among each other - without having to assign fixed shares to each leaf, and without nested groups having to echo higher-level settings. The floating protection composes naturally with fixed protection. Consider the following example tree: A A: low = 2G / \ A1: low = 1G A1 A2 A2: low = 0G As outside pressure is applied to this tree, A1 will enjoy a fixed protection from A2 of 1G, but the remaining, unclaimed 1G from A is split evenly among A1 and A2, coming out to 1.5G and 0.5G. There is a slight risk of regressing theoretical setups where the top-level cgroups don't know about the true budgeting and set bogusly high "bypass" values that are meaningfully allocated down the tree. Such setups would rely on unclaimed protection to be discarded, and distributing it would change the intended behavior. Be safe and hide the new behavior behind a mount option, 'memory_recursiveprot'. Signed-off-by:Tejun Heo <tj@kernel.org> Acked-by:
-
Johannes Weiner authored
The effective protection of any given cgroup is a somewhat complicated construct that depends on the ancestor's configuration, siblings' configurations, as well as current memory utilization in all these groups. It's done this way to satisfy hierarchical delegation requirements while also making the configuration semantics flexible and expressive in complex real life scenarios. Unfortunately, all the rules and requirements are sparsely documented, and the code is a little too clever in merging different scenarios into a single min() expression. This makes it hard to reason about the implementation and avoid breaking semantics when making changes to it. This patch documents each semantic rule individually and splits out the handling of the overcommit case from the regular case. Michal Koutný also points out that the points of equilibrium as described in the existing example scenarios aren't actually accurate. Delete these examples for now to avoid confusion. Signed-off-by:
-
Johannes Weiner authored
Patch series "mm: memcontrol: recursive memory.low protection", v3. The current memory.low (and memory.min) semantics require protection to be assigned to a cgroup in an untinterrupted chain from the top-level cgroup all the way to the leaf. In practice, we want to protect entire cgroup subtrees from each other (system management software vs. workload), but we would like the VM to balance memory optimally *within* each subtree, without having to make explicit weight allocations among individual components. The current semantics make that impossible. They also introduce unmanageable complexity into more advanced resource trees. For example: host root `- system.slice `- rpm upgrades `- logging `- workload.slice `- a container `- system.slice `- workload.slice `- job A `- component 1 `- component 2 `- job B At a host-level perspective, we would like to protect the outer workload.slice subtree as a whole from rpm upgrades, logging etc. But for that to be effective, right now we'd have to propagate it down through the container, the inner workload.slice, into the job cgroup and ultimately the component cgroups where memory is actually, physically allocated. This may cross several tree delegation points and namespace boundaries, which make such a setup near impossible. CPU and IO on the other hand are already distributed recursively. The user would simply configure allowances at the host level, and they would apply to the entire subtree without any downward propagation. To enable the above-mentioned usecases and bring memory in line with other resource controllers, this patch series extends memory.low/min such that settings apply recursively to the entire subtree. Users can still assign explicit shares in subgroups, but if they don't, any ancestral protection will be distributed such that children compete freely amongst each other - as if no memory control were enabled inside the subtree - but enjoy protection from neighboring trees. In the above example, the user would then be able to configure shares of CPU, IO and memory at the host level to comprehensively protect and isolate the workload.slice as a whole from system.slice activity. Patch #1 fixes an existing bug that can give a cgroup tree more protection than it should receive as per ancestor configuration. Patch #2 simplifies and documents the existing code to make it easier to reason about the changes in the next patch. Patch #3 finally implements recursive memory protection semantics. Because of a risk of regressing legacy setups, the new semantics are hidden behind a cgroup2 mount option, 'memory_recursiveprot'. More details in patch #3. This patch (of 3): When memory.low is overcommitted - i.e. the children claim more protection than their shared ancestor grants them - the allowance is distributed in proportion to how much each sibling uses their own declared protection: low_usage = min(memory.low, memory.current) elow = parent_elow * (low_usage / siblings_low_usage) However, siblings_low_usage is not the sum of all low_usages. It sums up the usages of *only those cgroups that are within their memory.low* That means that low_usage can be *bigger* than siblings_low_usage, and consequently the total protection afforded to the children can be bigger than what the ancestor grants the subtree. Consider three groups where two are in excess of their protection: A/memory.low = 10G A/A1/memory.low = 10G, memory.current = 20G A/A2/memory.low = 10G, memory.current = 20G A/A3/memory.low = 10G, memory.current = 8G siblings_low_usage = 8G (only A3 contributes) A1/elow = parent_elow(10G) * low_usage(10G) / siblings_low_usage(8G) = 12.5G -> 10G A2/elow = parent_elow(10G) * low_usage(10G) / siblings_low_usage(8G) = 12.5G -> 10G A3/elow = parent_elow(10G) * low_usage(8G) / siblings_low_usage(8G) = 10.0G (the 12.5G are capped to the explicit memory.low setting of 10G) With that, the sum of all awarded protection below A is 30G, when A only grants 10G for the entire subtree. What does this mean in practice? A1 and A2 would still be in excess of their 10G allowance and would be reclaimed, whereas A3 would not. As they eventually drop below their protection setting, they would be counted in siblings_low_usage again and the error would right itself. When reclaim was applied in a binary fashion (cgroup is reclaimed when it's above its protection, otherwise it's skipped) this would actually work out just fine. However, since 1bc63fb1 ("mm, memcg: make scan aggression always exclude protection"), reclaim pressure is scaled to how much a cgroup is above its protection. As a result this calculation error unduly skews pressure away from A1 and A2 toward the rest of the system. But why did we do it like this in the first place? The reasoning behind exempting groups in excess from siblings_low_usage was to go after them first during reclaim in an overcommitted subtree: A/memory.low = 2G, memory.current = 4G A/A1/memory.low = 3G, memory.current = 2G A/A2/memory.low = 1G, memory.current = 2G siblings_low_usage = 2G (only A1 contributes) A1/elow = parent_elow(2G) * low_usage(2G) / siblings_low_usage(2G) = 2G A2/elow = parent_elow(2G) * low_usage(1G) / siblings_low_usage(2G) = 1G While the children combined are overcomitting A and are technically both at fault, A2 is actively declaring unprotected memory and we would like to reclaim that first. However, while this sounds like a noble goal on the face of it, it doesn't make much difference in actual memory distribution: Because A is overcommitted, reclaim will not stop once A2 gets pushed back to within its allowance; we'll have to reclaim A1 either way. The end result is still that protection is distributed proportionally, with A1 getting 3/4 (1.5G) and A2 getting 1/4 (0.5G) of A's allowance. [ If A weren't overcommitted, it wouldn't make a difference since each cgroup would just get the protection it declares: A/memory.low = 2G, memory.current = 3G A/A1/memory.low = 1G, memory.current = 1G A/A2/memory.low = 1G, memory.current = 2G With the current calculation: siblings_low_usage = 1G (only A1 contributes) A1/elow = parent_elow(2G) * low_usage(1G) / siblings_low_usage(1G) = 2G -> 1G A2/elow = parent_elow(2G) * low_usage(1G) / siblings_low_usage(1G) = 2G -> 1G Including excess groups in siblings_low_usage: siblings_low_usage = 2G A1/elow = parent_elow(2G) * low_usage(1G) / siblings_low_usage(2G) = 1G -> 1G A2/elow = parent_elow(2G) * low_usage(1G) / siblings_low_usage(2G) = 1G -> 1G ] Simplify the calculation and fix the proportional reclaim bug by including excess cgroups in siblings_low_usage. After this patch, the effective memory.low distribution from the example above would be as follows: A/memory.low = 10G A/A1/memory.low = 10G, memory.current = 20G A/A2/memory.low = 10G, memory.current = 20G A/A3/memory.low = 10G, memory.current = 8G siblings_low_usage = 28G A1/elow = parent_elow(10G) * low_usage(10G) / siblings_low_usage(28G) = 3.5G A2/elow = parent_elow(10G) * low_usage(10G) / siblings_low_usage(28G) = 3.5G A3/elow = parent_elow(10G) * low_usage(8G) / siblings_low_usage(28G) = 2.8G Fixes: 1bc63fb1 ("mm, memcg: make scan aggression always exclude protection") Fixes: 23067153 ("mm: memory.low hierarchical behavior") Signed-off-by: -
Roman Gushchin authored
Drop the _memcg suffix from (__)memcg_kmem_(un)charge functions. It's shorter and more obvious. These are the most basic functions which are just (un)charging the given cgroup with the given amount of pages. Also fix up the corresponding comments. Signed-off-by:
-
Roman Gushchin authored
There are many places in memcg_charge_slab() and memcg_uncharge_slab() which are calculating the number of pages to charge, css references to grab etc depending on the order of the slab page. Let's simplify the code by calculating it once and caching in the local variable. Signed-off-by:
-
Roman Gushchin authored
These functions are charging the given number of kernel pages to the given memory cgroup. The number doesn't have to be a power of two. Let's make them to take the unsigned int nr_pages as an argument instead of the page order. It makes them look consistent with the corresponding uncharge functions and functions like: mem_cgroup_charge_skmem(memcg, nr_pages). Signed-off-by:
-
Roman Gushchin authored
Rename (__)memcg_kmem_(un)charge() into (__)memcg_kmem_(un)charge_page() to better reflect what they are actually doing: 1) call __memcg_kmem_(un)charge_memcg() to actually charge or uncharge the current memcg 2) set or clear the PageKmemcg flag Signed-off-by:
-
Roman Gushchin authored
Drop the unused page argument and put the memcg pointer at the first place. This make the function consistent with its peers: __memcg_kmem_uncharge_memcg(), memcg_kmem_charge_memcg(), etc. Signed-off-by:
-
