| 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
| ||
|
Message-ID: <xr93r5hojtly.fsf@ninji.mtv.corp.google.com>
Date: Tue, 24 Aug 2010 01:35:37 -0700
From: Greg Thelen <gthelen@...gle.com>
To: KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki <kamezawa.hiroyu@...fujitsu.com>
Cc: linux-mm@...ck.org,
"nishimura\@mxp.nes.nec.co.jp" <nishimura@....nes.nec.co.jp>,
"balbir\@linux.vnet.ibm.com" <balbir@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>,
m-ikeda@...jp.nec.com,
"akpm\@linux-foundation.org" <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
"linux-kernel\@vger.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
kamezawa.hiroyuki@...il.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH] memcg: use ID in page_cgroup
KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki <kamezawa.hiroyu@...fujitsu.com> writes:
> On Tue, 24 Aug 2010 00:47:50 -0700
> Greg Thelen <gthelen@...gle.com> wrote:
>
>> KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki <kamezawa.hiroyu@...fujitsu.com> writes:
>>
>> > I have an idea to remove page_cgroup->page pointer, 8bytes reduction per page.
>> > But it will be after this work.
>> > ==
>> > From: KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki <kamezawa.hiroyu@...fujitsu.com>
>> >
>> > Now, addresses of memory cgroup can be calculated by their ID without complex.
>> > This patch relplaces pc->mem_cgroup from a pointer to a unsigned short.
>> > On 64bit architecture, this offers us more 6bytes room per page_cgroup.
>> > Use 2bytes for blkio-cgroup's page tracking. More 4bytes will be used for
>> > some light-weight concurrent access.
>> >
>> > We may able to move this id onto flags field but ...go step by step.
>> >
>> > Changelog: 20100811
>> > - using new rcu APIs, as rcu_dereference_check() etc.
>> > Changelog: 20100804
>> > - added comments to page_cgroup.h
>> > Changelog: 20100730
>> > - fixed some garbage added by debug code in early stage
>> >
>> > Signed-off-by: KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki <kamezawa.hiroyu@...fujitsu.com>
>> > ---
>> > include/linux/page_cgroup.h | 6 ++++-
>> > mm/memcontrol.c | 52 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++-----------------
>> > mm/page_cgroup.c | 2 -
>> > 3 files changed, 38 insertions(+), 22 deletions(-)
>> >
>> > Index: mmotm-0811/include/linux/page_cgroup.h
>> > ===================================================================
>> > --- mmotm-0811.orig/include/linux/page_cgroup.h
>> > +++ mmotm-0811/include/linux/page_cgroup.h
>> > @@ -9,10 +9,14 @@
>> > * page_cgroup helps us identify information about the cgroup
>> > * All page cgroups are allocated at boot or memory hotplug event,
>> > * then the page cgroup for pfn always exists.
>> > + *
>> > + * TODO: It seems ID for cgroup can be packed into "flags". But there will
>> > + * be race between assigning ID <-> set/clear flags. Please be careful.
>> > */
>> > struct page_cgroup {
>> > unsigned long flags;
>> > - struct mem_cgroup *mem_cgroup;
>> > + unsigned short mem_cgroup; /* ID of assigned memory cgroup */
>> > + unsigned short blk_cgroup; /* Not Used..but will be. */
>> > struct page *page;
>> > struct list_head lru; /* per cgroup LRU list */
>> > };
>> > Index: mmotm-0811/mm/page_cgroup.c
>> > ===================================================================
>> > --- mmotm-0811.orig/mm/page_cgroup.c
>> > +++ mmotm-0811/mm/page_cgroup.c
>> > @@ -15,7 +15,7 @@ static void __meminit
>> > __init_page_cgroup(struct page_cgroup *pc, unsigned long pfn)
>> > {
>> > pc->flags = 0;
>> > - pc->mem_cgroup = NULL;
>> > + pc->mem_cgroup = 0;
>> > pc->page = pfn_to_page(pfn);
>> > INIT_LIST_HEAD(&pc->lru);
>> > }
>> > Index: mmotm-0811/mm/memcontrol.c
>> > ===================================================================
>> > --- mmotm-0811.orig/mm/memcontrol.c
>> > +++ mmotm-0811/mm/memcontrol.c
>> > @@ -300,12 +300,13 @@ static atomic_t mem_cgroup_num;
>> > #define NR_MEMCG_GROUPS (CONFIG_MEM_CGROUP_MAX_GROUPS + 1)
>> > static struct mem_cgroup *mem_cgroups[NR_MEMCG_GROUPS] __read_mostly;
>> >
>> > -/* Must be called under rcu_read_lock */
>> > -static struct mem_cgroup *id_to_memcg(unsigned short id)
>> > +/* Must be called under rcu_read_lock, set safe==true if under lock */
>> > +static struct mem_cgroup *id_to_memcg(unsigned short id, bool safe)
>> > {
>> > struct mem_cgroup *ret;
>> > /* see mem_cgroup_free() */
>> > - ret = rcu_dereference_check(mem_cgroups[id], rch_read_lock_held());
>> > + ret = rcu_dereference_check(mem_cgroups[id],
>> > + rch_read_lock_held() || safe);
>> > if (likely(ret && ret->valid))
>> > return ret;
>> > return NULL;
>> > @@ -381,7 +382,12 @@ struct cgroup_subsys_state *mem_cgroup_c
>> > static struct mem_cgroup_per_zone *
>> > page_cgroup_zoneinfo(struct page_cgroup *pc)
>> > {
>> > - struct mem_cgroup *mem = pc->mem_cgroup;
>> > + /*
>> > + * The caller should guarantee this "pc" is under lock. In typical
>> > + * case, this function is called by lru function with zone->lru_lock.
>> > + * It is a safe access.
>> > + */
>> > + struct mem_cgroup *mem = id_to_memcg(pc->mem_cgroup, true);
>> > int nid = page_cgroup_nid(pc);
>> > int zid = page_cgroup_zid(pc);
>> >
>> > @@ -723,6 +729,11 @@ static inline bool mem_cgroup_is_root(st
>> > return (mem == root_mem_cgroup);
>> > }
>> >
>> > +static inline bool mem_cgroup_is_rootid(unsigned short id)
>> > +{
>> > + return (id == 1);
>> > +}
>> > +
>> > /*
>> > * Following LRU functions are allowed to be used without PCG_LOCK.
>> > * Operations are called by routine of global LRU independently from memcg.
>> > @@ -755,7 +766,7 @@ void mem_cgroup_del_lru_list(struct page
>> > */
>> > mz = page_cgroup_zoneinfo(pc);
>> > MEM_CGROUP_ZSTAT(mz, lru) -= 1;
>> > - if (mem_cgroup_is_root(pc->mem_cgroup))
>> > + if (mem_cgroup_is_rootid(pc->mem_cgroup))
>> > return;
>> > VM_BUG_ON(list_empty(&pc->lru));
>> > list_del_init(&pc->lru);
>> > @@ -782,7 +793,7 @@ void mem_cgroup_rotate_lru_list(struct p
>> > */
>> > smp_rmb();
>> > /* unused or root page is not rotated. */
>> > - if (!PageCgroupUsed(pc) || mem_cgroup_is_root(pc->mem_cgroup))
>> > + if (!PageCgroupUsed(pc) || mem_cgroup_is_rootid(pc->mem_cgroup))
>> > return;
>> > mz = page_cgroup_zoneinfo(pc);
>> > list_move(&pc->lru, &mz->lists[lru]);
>> > @@ -808,7 +819,7 @@ void mem_cgroup_add_lru_list(struct page
>> > mz = page_cgroup_zoneinfo(pc);
>> > MEM_CGROUP_ZSTAT(mz, lru) += 1;
>> > SetPageCgroupAcctLRU(pc);
>> > - if (mem_cgroup_is_root(pc->mem_cgroup))
>> > + if (mem_cgroup_is_rootid(pc->mem_cgroup))
>> > return;
>> > list_add(&pc->lru, &mz->lists[lru]);
>> > }
>> > @@ -1497,7 +1508,7 @@ void mem_cgroup_update_file_mapped(struc
>> > return;
>> >
>> > lock_page_cgroup(pc);
>> > - mem = pc->mem_cgroup;
>> > + mem = id_to_memcg(pc->mem_cgroup, true);
>> > if (!mem || !PageCgroupUsed(pc))
>> > goto done;
>> >
>> > @@ -1885,14 +1896,14 @@ struct mem_cgroup *try_get_mem_cgroup_fr
>> > pc = lookup_page_cgroup(page);
>> > lock_page_cgroup(pc);
>> > if (PageCgroupUsed(pc)) {
>> > - mem = pc->mem_cgroup;
>> > + mem = id_to_memcg(pc->mem_cgroup, true);
>> > if (mem && !css_tryget(&mem->css))
>> > mem = NULL;
>> > } else if (PageSwapCache(page)) {
>> > ent.val = page_private(page);
>> > id = lookup_swap_cgroup(ent);
>> > rcu_read_lock();
>> > - mem = id_to_memcg(id);
>> > + mem = id_to_memcg(id, false);
>> > if (mem && !css_tryget(&mem->css))
>> > mem = NULL;
>> > rcu_read_unlock();
>> > @@ -1921,7 +1932,7 @@ static void __mem_cgroup_commit_charge(s
>> > return;
>> > }
>> >
>> > - pc->mem_cgroup = mem;
>> > + pc->mem_cgroup = css_id(&mem->css);
>> > /*
>> > * We access a page_cgroup asynchronously without lock_page_cgroup().
>> > * Especially when a page_cgroup is taken from a page, pc->mem_cgroup
>> > @@ -1979,7 +1990,7 @@ static void __mem_cgroup_move_account(st
>> > VM_BUG_ON(PageLRU(pc->page));
>> > VM_BUG_ON(!PageCgroupLocked(pc));
>>
>> Should this be VM_BUG_ON(!rcu_read_lock_held())? I suspect that
>> mem_cgroup_move_account() should grab rcu read lock (see my comment below).
>>
>
> No. (see below)
>
>
>> > VM_BUG_ON(!PageCgroupUsed(pc));
>> > - VM_BUG_ON(pc->mem_cgroup != from);
>> > + VM_BUG_ON(id_to_memcg(pc->mem_cgroup, true) != from);
>> >
>> > if (PageCgroupFileMapped(pc)) {
>> > /* Update mapped_file data for mem_cgroup */
>> > @@ -1994,7 +2005,7 @@ static void __mem_cgroup_move_account(st
>> > mem_cgroup_cancel_charge(from);
>> >
>> > /* caller should have done css_get */
>> > - pc->mem_cgroup = to;
>> > + pc->mem_cgroup = css_id(&to->css);
>> > mem_cgroup_charge_statistics(to, pc, true);
>> > /*
>> > * We charges against "to" which may not have any tasks. Then, "to"
>> > @@ -2014,11 +2025,11 @@ static int mem_cgroup_move_account(struc
>> > {
>> > int ret = -EINVAL;
>> > lock_page_cgroup(pc);
>>
>> Should this be rcu_read_lock() instead of lock_page_cgroup()?
>>
>
> No.
> - lock_page_cgroup() is for keeping page_cgroup's status stable.
> - rcu_read_lock() is for delaying to discard mem_cgroup object.
>
> rcu_read_lock() is just for delaying to discard object, not for avoiding
> racy updates. All _updates_ requires proper lock or speculative logic as
> atomic_inc_not_zero() etc... Basically, RCU is for avoiding use-after-free.
Thanks for the info. Referring to your original patch:
> @@ -2014,11 +2025,11 @@ static int mem_cgroup_move_account(struc
> {
> int ret = -EINVAL;
> lock_page_cgroup(pc);
> - if (PageCgroupUsed(pc) && pc->mem_cgroup == from) {
> + if (PageCgroupUsed(pc) && id_to_memcg(pc->mem_cgroup, true) == from) {
> __mem_cgroup_move_account(pc, from, to, uncharge);
> ret = 0;
> }
> - unlock_page_cgroup(pc);
> + rcu_read_unlock();
>
It seems like mem_cgroup_move_account() is not balanced. Why is
lock_page_cgroup(pc) used to lock but rcu_read_unlock() used to unlock?
--
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