[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <20090511092241.f332a1d6.nishimura@mxp.nes.nec.co.jp>
Date: Mon, 11 May 2009 09:22:41 +0900
From: Daisuke Nishimura <nishimura@....nes.nec.co.jp>
To: balbir@...ux.vnet.ibm.com
Cc: nishimura@....nes.nec.co.jp,
KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki <kamezawa.hiroyu@...fujitsu.com>,
"linux-mm@...ck.org" <linux-mm@...ck.org>,
"hugh@...itas.com" <hugh@...itas.com>,
"akpm@...ux-foundation.org" <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/2] memcg fix stale swap cache account leak v6
On Fri, 8 May 2009 22:26:36 +0530, Balbir Singh <balbir@...ux.vnet.ibm.com> wrote:
> * KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki <kamezawa.hiroyu@...fujitsu.com> [2009-05-08 14:09:10]:
>
> > From: KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki <kamezawa.hiroyu@...fujitsu.com>
> >
> > In general, Linux's swp_entry handling is done by combination of lazy techniques
> > and global LRU. It works well but when we use mem+swap controller, some more
> > strict control is appropriate. Otherwise, swp_entry used by a cgroup will be
> > never freed until global LRU works. In a system where memcg is well-configured,
> > global LRU doesn't work frequently.
> >
> > Example A) Assume a swap cache which is not mapped.
> > CPU0 CPU1
> > zap_pte().... shrink_page_list()
> > free_swap_and_cache() lock_page()
> > page seems busy.
> >
> > Example B) Assume swapin-readahead.
> > CPU0 CPU1
> > zap_pte() read_swap_cache_async()
> > swap_duplicate().
> > swap_entry_free() = 1
> > find_get_page()=> NULL.
> > add_to_swap_cache().
> > issue swap I/O.
> >
> > There are many patterns of this kind of race (but no problems).
> >
> > free_swap_and_cache() is called for freeing swp_entry. But it is a best-effort
> > function. If the swp_entry/page seems busy, swp_entry is not freed.
> > This is not a problem because global-LRU will find SwapCache at page reclaim.
> >
> > If memcg is used, on the other hand, global LRU may not work. Then, above
> > unused SwapCache will not be freed.
> > (unmapped SwapCache occupy swp_entry but never be freed if not on memcg's LRU)
> >
> > So, even if there are no tasks in a cgroup, swp_entry usage still remains.
> > In bad case, OOM by mem+swap controller is triggered by this "leak" of
> > swp_entry as Nishimura reported.
> >
> > Considering this issue, swapin-readahead itself is not very good for memcg.
> > It read swap cache which will not be used. (and _unused_ swapcache will
> > not be accounted.) Even if we account swap cache at add_to_swap_cache(),
> > we need to account page to several _unrelated_ memcg. This is bad.
> >
> > This patch tries to fix racy case of free_swap_and_cache() and page status.
> >
> > After this patch applied, following test works well.
> >
> > # echo 1-2M > ../memory.limit_in_bytes
> > # run tasks under memcg.
> > # kill all tasks and make memory.tasks empty
> > # check memory.memsw.usage_in_bytes == memory.usage_in_bytes and
> > there is no _used_ swp_entry.
> >
> > What this patch does is
> > - avoid swapin-readahead when memcg is activated.
> > - try to free swapcache immediately after Writeback is done.
> > - Handle racy case of __remove_mapping() in vmscan.c
> >
> > TODO:
> > - tmpfs should use real readahead rather than swapin readahead...
> >
> > Changelog: v5 -> v6
> > - works only when memcg is activated.
> > - check after I/O works only after writeback.
> > - avoid swapin-readahead when memcg is activated.
> > - fixed page refcnt issue.
> > Changelog: v4->v5
> > - completely new design.
> >
> > Reported-by: Daisuke Nishimura <nishimura@....nes.nec.co.jp>
> > Signed-off-by: KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki <kamezawa.hiroyu@...fujitsu.com>
>
> I know we discussed readahead changes this in the past
>
> 1. the memcg_activated() check should be memcg_swap_activated(), no?
> In type 1, the problem can be solved by unaccounting the pages
> in swap_entry_free
> Type 2 is not a problem, since the accounting is already correct
> Hence my assertion that this problem occurs only when swapaccount
> is enabled.
No.
Both type-1 and type-2 have the problem that swp_entry is not freed correctly.
This problem has nothing to do with whether mem+swap controller is enabled or not.
Thanks,
Daisuke Nishimura.
> 2. I don't mind adding space overhead to swap_cgroup, if this problem
> can be fought that way. The approaches so far have made my head go
> round.
> 3. Disabling readahead is a big decision and will need loads of
> review/data before we can decide to go this route.
>
>
> --
> Balbir
--
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