Date:	Fri, 30 Mar 2012 08:18:40 +0200
From:	Glauber Costa <glommer@...allels.com>
To:	KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki <kamezawa.hiroyu@...fujitsu.com>
CC:	<netdev@...r.kernel.org>, David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>,
	Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>
Subject: Re: [BUGFIX][PATCH 2/3] memcg/tcp: remove static_branch_slow_dec()
 at changing limit

On 03/30/2012 01:51 AM, KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki wrote:
> (2012/03/29 19:58), Glauber Costa wrote:
> 
>> On 03/29/2012 09:07 AM, KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki wrote:
>>> tcp memcontrol uses static_branch to optimize limit=RESOURCE_MAX case.
>>> If all cgroup's limit=RESOUCE_MAX, resource usage is not accounted.
>>> But it's buggy now.
>>>
>>> For example, do following
>>>    # while sleep 1;do
>>>      echo 9223372036854775807>   /cgroup/memory/A/memory.kmem.tcp.limit_in_bytes;
>>>      echo 300M>   /cgroup/memory/A/memory.kmem.tcp.limit_in_bytes;
>>>      done
>>>
>>> and run network application under A. tcp's usage is sometimes accounted
>>> and sometimes not accounted because of frequent changes of static_branch.
>>> Then, finally, you can see broken tcp.usage_in_bytes.
>>> WARN_ON() is printed because res_counter->usage goes below 0.
>>> ==
>>> kernel: ------------[ cut here ]----------
>>> kernel: WARNING: at kernel/res_counter.c:96 res_counter_uncharge_locked+0x37/0x40()
>>>    <snip>
>>> kernel: Pid: 17753, comm: bash Tainted: G  W    3.3.0+ #99
>>> kernel: Call Trace:
>>> kernel:<IRQ>    [<ffffffff8104cc9f>] warn_slowpath_common+0x7f/0xc0
>>> kernel: [<ffffffff810d7e88>] ? rb_reserve__next_event+0x68/0x470
>>> kernel: [<ffffffff8104ccfa>] warn_slowpath_null+0x1a/0x20
>>> kernel: [<ffffffff810b4e37>] res_counter_uncharge_locked+0x37/0x40
>>> ...
>>> ==
>>>
>>> This patch removes static_branch_slow_dec() at changing res_counter's
>>> limit to RESOUCE_MAX. By this, once accounting started, the accountting
>>> will continue until the tcp cgroup is destroyed.
>>>
>>> I think this will not be problem in real use.
>>>
>>
>> So...
>>
>> Are the warnings still there if you have your other patch in this series?
> 
> 
> I wrote patch 3/3 after 2/3 because I found all case cannot be fixed by this.
> 
> So, comparing patch 3/3 this fixes is leaking.
> Considering following sequence
> 
> 	enable accounting
> 	tcp allocate buffer
> 	disable accounting
> 	tcp free buffer
> 
> The accounted usage nerver disappear. This is the probelem which cannot be
> covered by patch 3/3. Maybe it's better to change order of patches 3/3 ->  2/3
> and describe this explicitly.
> 
>> Maybe what we should do is, flush the resource counters so they go back
>> to 0 besides decrementing the static branch. This way we get a more
>> consistent behavior.
>>
> 
> set all memcg's usage to be 0 at enable/disable accounting ?
> But, there is a problem which static_branch() update is slow. So,
> IIUC, we can't catch all cases because of races.
> 
> 
>> Another thing to keep in mind, is that the static branch will only be
>> inactive if we turn off *all* controllers. You see this happening
>> because you are only testing with one.
> 
> yes. So, the behavior change by this patch will not affect usual cases.
> 
>> So even if we go to the route you're proposing, we could probably try
>> doing something on the
>> global level, instead of a per-memcg boolean flat.
> 
> In global level, static_key's counter handles it.
> 

I gave it a bit more thought through the night... and I guess your
solution is okay.

--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe netdev" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html

Powered by blists - more mailing lists