| lists.openwall.net | lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC | |
|
Open Source and information security mailing list archives
| ||
|
Date: Tue, 9 Mar 2010 10:29:28 +0900
From: Daisuke Nishimura <nishimura@....nes.nec.co.jp>
To: KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki <kamezawa.hiroyu@...fujitsu.com>
Cc: Andrea Righi <arighi@...eler.com>,
Balbir Singh <balbir@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>,
Vivek Goyal <vgoyal@...hat.com>,
Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
Trond Myklebust <trond.myklebust@....uio.no>,
Suleiman Souhlal <suleiman@...gle.com>,
Greg Thelen <gthelen@...gle.com>,
"Kirill A. Shutemov" <kirill@...temov.name>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
containers@...ts.linux-foundation.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-mm@...ck.org,
Daisuke Nishimura <nishimura@....nes.nec.co.jp>
Subject: [PATCH mmotm 2.5/4] memcg: disable irq at page cgroup lock (Re:
[PATCH -mmotm 3/4] memcg: dirty pages accounting and limiting
infrastructure)
On Tue, 9 Mar 2010 09:19:14 +0900, KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki <kamezawa.hiroyu@...fujitsu.com> wrote:
> On Tue, 9 Mar 2010 01:12:52 +0100
> Andrea Righi <arighi@...eler.com> wrote:
>
> > On Mon, Mar 08, 2010 at 05:31:00PM +0900, KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki wrote:
> > > On Mon, 8 Mar 2010 17:07:11 +0900
> > > Daisuke Nishimura <nishimura@....nes.nec.co.jp> wrote:
> > >
> > > > On Mon, 8 Mar 2010 11:37:11 +0900, KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki <kamezawa.hiroyu@...fujitsu.com> wrote:
> > > > > On Mon, 8 Mar 2010 11:17:24 +0900
> > > > > Daisuke Nishimura <nishimura@....nes.nec.co.jp> wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > > > But IIRC, clear_writeback is done under treelock.... No ?
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > The place where NR_WRITEBACK is updated is out of tree_lock.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > 1311 int test_clear_page_writeback(struct page *page)
> > > > > > 1312 {
> > > > > > 1313 struct address_space *mapping = page_mapping(page);
> > > > > > 1314 int ret;
> > > > > > 1315
> > > > > > 1316 if (mapping) {
> > > > > > 1317 struct backing_dev_info *bdi = mapping->backing_dev_info;
> > > > > > 1318 unsigned long flags;
> > > > > > 1319
> > > > > > 1320 spin_lock_irqsave(&mapping->tree_lock, flags);
> > > > > > 1321 ret = TestClearPageWriteback(page);
> > > > > > 1322 if (ret) {
> > > > > > 1323 radix_tree_tag_clear(&mapping->page_tree,
> > > > > > 1324 page_index(page),
> > > > > > 1325 PAGECACHE_TAG_WRITEBACK);
> > > > > > 1326 if (bdi_cap_account_writeback(bdi)) {
> > > > > > 1327 __dec_bdi_stat(bdi, BDI_WRITEBACK);
> > > > > > 1328 __bdi_writeout_inc(bdi);
> > > > > > 1329 }
> > > > > > 1330 }
> > > > > > 1331 spin_unlock_irqrestore(&mapping->tree_lock, flags);
> > > > > > 1332 } else {
> > > > > > 1333 ret = TestClearPageWriteback(page);
> > > > > > 1334 }
> > > > > > 1335 if (ret)
> > > > > > 1336 dec_zone_page_state(page, NR_WRITEBACK);
> > > > > > 1337 return ret;
> > > > > > 1338 }
> > > > >
> > > > > We can move this up to under tree_lock. Considering memcg, all our target has "mapping".
> > > > >
> > > > > If we newly account bounce-buffers (for NILFS, FUSE, etc..), which has no ->mapping,
> > > > > we need much more complex new charge/uncharge theory.
> > > > >
> > > > > But yes, adding new lock scheme seems complicated. (Sorry Andrea.)
> > > > > My concerns is performance. We may need somehing new re-implementation of
> > > > > locks/migrate/charge/uncharge.
> > > > >
> > > > I agree. Performance is my concern too.
> > > >
> > > > I made a patch below and measured the time(average of 10 times) of kernel build
> > > > on tmpfs(make -j8 on 8 CPU machine with 2.6.33 defconfig).
> > > >
> > > > <before>
> > > > - root cgroup: 190.47 sec
> > > > - child cgroup: 192.81 sec
> > > >
> > > > <after>
> > > > - root cgroup: 191.06 sec
> > > > - child cgroup: 193.06 sec
> > > >
> > > > Hmm... about 0.3% slower for root, 0.1% slower for child.
> > > >
> > >
> > > Hmm...accepatable ? (sounds it's in error-range)
> > >
> > > BTW, why local_irq_disable() ?
> > > local_irq_save()/restore() isn't better ?
> >
> > Probably there's not the overhead of saving flags?
> maybe.
>
> > Anyway, it would make the code much more readable...
> >
> ok.
>
> please go ahead in this direction. Nishimura-san, would you post an
> independent patch ? If no, Andrea-san, please.
>
This is the updated version.
Andrea-san, can you merge this into your patch set ?
===
From: Daisuke Nishimura <nishimura@....nes.nec.co.jp>
In current implementation, we don't have to disable irq at lock_page_cgroup()
because the lock is never acquired in interrupt context.
But we are going to call it in later patch in an interrupt context or with
irq disabled, so this patch disables irq at lock_page_cgroup() and enables it
at unlock_page_cgroup().
Signed-off-by: Daisuke Nishimura <nishimura@....nes.nec.co.jp>
---
include/linux/page_cgroup.h | 16 ++++++++++++++--
mm/memcontrol.c | 43 +++++++++++++++++++++++++------------------
2 files changed, 39 insertions(+), 20 deletions(-)
diff --git a/include/linux/page_cgroup.h b/include/linux/page_cgroup.h
index 30b0813..0d2f92c 100644
--- a/include/linux/page_cgroup.h
+++ b/include/linux/page_cgroup.h
@@ -83,16 +83,28 @@ static inline enum zone_type page_cgroup_zid(struct page_cgroup *pc)
return page_zonenum(pc->page);
}
-static inline void lock_page_cgroup(struct page_cgroup *pc)
+static inline void __lock_page_cgroup(struct page_cgroup *pc)
{
bit_spin_lock(PCG_LOCK, &pc->flags);
}
-static inline void unlock_page_cgroup(struct page_cgroup *pc)
+static inline void __unlock_page_cgroup(struct page_cgroup *pc)
{
bit_spin_unlock(PCG_LOCK, &pc->flags);
}
+#define lock_page_cgroup(pc, flags) \
+ do { \
+ local_irq_save(flags); \
+ __lock_page_cgroup(pc); \
+ } while (0)
+
+#define unlock_page_cgroup(pc, flags) \
+ do { \
+ __unlock_page_cgroup(pc); \
+ local_irq_restore(flags); \
+ } while (0)
+
#else /* CONFIG_CGROUP_MEM_RES_CTLR */
struct page_cgroup;
diff --git a/mm/memcontrol.c b/mm/memcontrol.c
index 7fab84e..a9fd736 100644
--- a/mm/memcontrol.c
+++ b/mm/memcontrol.c
@@ -1352,12 +1352,13 @@ void mem_cgroup_update_file_mapped(struct page *page, int val)
{
struct mem_cgroup *mem;
struct page_cgroup *pc;
+ unsigned long flags;
pc = lookup_page_cgroup(page);
if (unlikely(!pc))
return;
- lock_page_cgroup(pc);
+ lock_page_cgroup(pc, flags);
mem = pc->mem_cgroup;
if (!mem)
goto done;
@@ -1371,7 +1372,7 @@ void mem_cgroup_update_file_mapped(struct page *page, int val)
__this_cpu_add(mem->stat->count[MEM_CGROUP_STAT_FILE_MAPPED], val);
done:
- unlock_page_cgroup(pc);
+ unlock_page_cgroup(pc, flags);
}
/*
@@ -1705,11 +1706,12 @@ struct mem_cgroup *try_get_mem_cgroup_from_page(struct page *page)
struct page_cgroup *pc;
unsigned short id;
swp_entry_t ent;
+ unsigned long flags;
VM_BUG_ON(!PageLocked(page));
pc = lookup_page_cgroup(page);
- lock_page_cgroup(pc);
+ lock_page_cgroup(pc, flags);
if (PageCgroupUsed(pc)) {
mem = pc->mem_cgroup;
if (mem && !css_tryget(&mem->css))
@@ -1723,7 +1725,7 @@ struct mem_cgroup *try_get_mem_cgroup_from_page(struct page *page)
mem = NULL;
rcu_read_unlock();
}
- unlock_page_cgroup(pc);
+ unlock_page_cgroup(pc, flags);
return mem;
}
@@ -1736,13 +1738,15 @@ static void __mem_cgroup_commit_charge(struct mem_cgroup *mem,
struct page_cgroup *pc,
enum charge_type ctype)
{
+ unsigned long flags;
+
/* try_charge() can return NULL to *memcg, taking care of it. */
if (!mem)
return;
- lock_page_cgroup(pc);
+ lock_page_cgroup(pc, flags);
if (unlikely(PageCgroupUsed(pc))) {
- unlock_page_cgroup(pc);
+ unlock_page_cgroup(pc, flags);
mem_cgroup_cancel_charge(mem);
return;
}
@@ -1772,7 +1776,7 @@ static void __mem_cgroup_commit_charge(struct mem_cgroup *mem,
mem_cgroup_charge_statistics(mem, pc, true);
- unlock_page_cgroup(pc);
+ unlock_page_cgroup(pc, flags);
/*
* "charge_statistics" updated event counter. Then, check it.
* Insert ancestor (and ancestor's ancestors), to softlimit RB-tree.
@@ -1842,12 +1846,13 @@ static int mem_cgroup_move_account(struct page_cgroup *pc,
struct mem_cgroup *from, struct mem_cgroup *to, bool uncharge)
{
int ret = -EINVAL;
- lock_page_cgroup(pc);
+ unsigned long flags;
+ lock_page_cgroup(pc, flags);
if (PageCgroupUsed(pc) && pc->mem_cgroup == from) {
__mem_cgroup_move_account(pc, from, to, uncharge);
ret = 0;
}
- unlock_page_cgroup(pc);
+ unlock_page_cgroup(pc, flags);
/*
* check events
*/
@@ -1974,17 +1979,17 @@ int mem_cgroup_cache_charge(struct page *page, struct mm_struct *mm,
*/
if (!(gfp_mask & __GFP_WAIT)) {
struct page_cgroup *pc;
-
+ unsigned long flags;
pc = lookup_page_cgroup(page);
if (!pc)
return 0;
- lock_page_cgroup(pc);
+ lock_page_cgroup(pc, flags);
if (PageCgroupUsed(pc)) {
- unlock_page_cgroup(pc);
+ unlock_page_cgroup(pc, flags);
return 0;
}
- unlock_page_cgroup(pc);
+ unlock_page_cgroup(pc, flags);
}
if (unlikely(!mm && !mem))
@@ -2166,6 +2171,7 @@ __mem_cgroup_uncharge_common(struct page *page, enum charge_type ctype)
struct page_cgroup *pc;
struct mem_cgroup *mem = NULL;
struct mem_cgroup_per_zone *mz;
+ unsigned long flags;
if (mem_cgroup_disabled())
return NULL;
@@ -2180,7 +2186,7 @@ __mem_cgroup_uncharge_common(struct page *page, enum charge_type ctype)
if (unlikely(!pc || !PageCgroupUsed(pc)))
return NULL;
- lock_page_cgroup(pc);
+ lock_page_cgroup(pc, flags);
mem = pc->mem_cgroup;
@@ -2219,7 +2225,7 @@ __mem_cgroup_uncharge_common(struct page *page, enum charge_type ctype)
*/
mz = page_cgroup_zoneinfo(pc);
- unlock_page_cgroup(pc);
+ unlock_page_cgroup(pc, flags);
memcg_check_events(mem, page);
/* at swapout, this memcg will be accessed to record to swap */
@@ -2229,7 +2235,7 @@ __mem_cgroup_uncharge_common(struct page *page, enum charge_type ctype)
return mem;
unlock_out:
- unlock_page_cgroup(pc);
+ unlock_page_cgroup(pc, flags);
return NULL;
}
@@ -2417,17 +2423,18 @@ int mem_cgroup_prepare_migration(struct page *page, struct mem_cgroup **ptr)
struct page_cgroup *pc;
struct mem_cgroup *mem = NULL;
int ret = 0;
+ unsigned long flags;
if (mem_cgroup_disabled())
return 0;
pc = lookup_page_cgroup(page);
- lock_page_cgroup(pc);
+ lock_page_cgroup(pc, flags);
if (PageCgroupUsed(pc)) {
mem = pc->mem_cgroup;
css_get(&mem->css);
}
- unlock_page_cgroup(pc);
+ unlock_page_cgroup(pc, flags);
if (mem) {
ret = __mem_cgroup_try_charge(NULL, GFP_KERNEL, &mem, false);
--
1.6.4
--
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