[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <4409.10.75.179.62.1229164064.squirrel@webmail-b.css.fujitsu.com>
Date: Sat, 13 Dec 2008 19:27:44 +0900 (JST)
From: "KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki" <kamezawa.hiroyu@...fujitsu.com>
To: "Hugh Dickins" <hugh@...itas.com>
Cc: "KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki" <kamezawa.hiroyu@...fujitsu.com>,
"Daisuke Nishimura" <nishimura@....nes.nec.co.jp>,
"linux-mm@...ck.org" <linux-mm@...ck.org>,
"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
"balbir@...ux.vnet.ibm.com" <balbir@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>,
"akpm@...ux-foundation.org" <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>
Subject: Re: [BUGFIX][PATCH mmotm] memcg fix swap accounting leak (v2)
Hugh Dickins said:
> On Sat, 13 Dec 2008, KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki wrote:
>> --- mmotm-2.6.28-Dec12.orig/mm/memory.c
>> +++ mmotm-2.6.28-Dec12/mm/memory.c
>>
>> - mem_cgroup_commit_charge_swapin(page, ptr);
>> inc_mm_counter(mm, anon_rss);
>> pte = mk_pte(page, vma->vm_page_prot);
>> if (write_access && reuse_swap_page(page)) {
>> pte = maybe_mkwrite(pte_mkdirty(pte), vma);
>> write_access = 0;
>> }
>> -
>> flush_icache_page(vma, page);
>> set_pte_at(mm, address, page_table, pte);
>> page_add_anon_rmap(page, vma, address);
>> + /* It's better to call commit-charge after rmap is established */
>> + mem_cgroup_commit_charge_swapin(page, ptr);
>>
>> swap_free(entry);
>> if (vm_swap_full() || (vma->vm_flags & VM_LOCKED) ||
>> PageMlocked(page))
>
> That ordering is back to how it was before I adjusted it
> for reuse_swap_page()'s delete_from_swap_cache(), isn't it?
>
> So I don't understand how you've fixed the bug I hit (not an
> accounting imbalance but an oops or BUG, I forget) with this
> ordering, without making some other change elsewhere.
>
Ah, this is for fixing the bug by this order of calls.
==
> mem_cgroup_commit_charge_swapin calls swap_cgroup_record with
> bogus swp_entry_t 0, which appears to belong to swp_offset 0 of
> swp_type 0, but the ctrl->map for type 0 may have been freed
> ages ago (we do always start from 0, but maybe we swapped on
> type 1 and swapped off type 0 meanwhile). I'm guessing that
> by looking at the code, not by retesting it, so I may have the
> details wrong; but I didn't reorder your code just for fun.
>
Ah, sorry. commit_charge_swapin() should chekc the page is still
SwapCache. Sorry. I'll update this in Monday.
> Perhaps your restored ordering works if you check PageSwapCache
> in mem_cgroup_commit_charge_swapin or check 0 in swap_cgroup_record,
> but I don't see that in yesterday's mmotm, nor in this patch.
>
yes. I'm wrong at that point.
I'll add PageSwapCache check to "commit" ops.
> (And I should admit, I've not even attempted to follow your
> accounting justification: I'll leave that to you memcg guys.)
>
> An alternative could be not to clear page->private when deleting
> from swap cache, that's only done for tidiness and to force notice
> of races like this; but I'd want a much stronger reason to change that.
>
Hmm, doesn't that change will add new unnecessary complex ?
> Or am I making this up? As I say, I've not tested it this time around.
>
I'll revisit this Monday and think of swp_entry==0 problem.
Thank you for pointing out.
-Kame
> Hugh
>
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists