linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] memcg: remove unneeded preempt

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

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <CAHH2K0b_jNHfAnSpDqBMKh4NbZCu8JrEcfjb+rputWKXgv5FLA@mail.gmail.com>
Date:	Thu, 18 Aug 2011 17:00:30 -0700
From:	Greg Thelen <gthelen@...gle.com>
To:	Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>
Cc:	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-mm@...ck.org,
	KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki <kamezawa.hiroyu@...fujitsu.com>,
	Balbir Singh <bsingharora@...il.com>,
	Daisuke Nishimura <nishimura@....nes.nec.co.jp>,
	linux-arch@...r.kernel.org, Valdis.Kletnieks@...edu,
	jweiner@...hat.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH] memcg: remove unneeded preempt_disable

On Thu, Aug 18, 2011 at 2:40 PM, Andrew Morton
<akpm@...ux-foundation.org> wrote:
> (cc linux-arch)
>
> On Wed, 17 Aug 2011 23:50:53 -0700
> Greg Thelen <gthelen@...gle.com> wrote:
>
>> Both mem_cgroup_charge_statistics() and mem_cgroup_move_account() were
>> unnecessarily disabling preemption when adjusting per-cpu counters:
>>     preempt_disable()
>>     __this_cpu_xxx()
>>     __this_cpu_yyy()
>>     preempt_enable()
>>
>> This change does not disable preemption and thus CPU switch is possible
>> within these routines.  This does not cause a problem because the total
>> of all cpu counters is summed when reporting stats.  Now both
>> mem_cgroup_charge_statistics() and mem_cgroup_move_account() look like:
>>     this_cpu_xxx()
>>     this_cpu_yyy()
>>
>> ...
>>
>> --- a/mm/memcontrol.c
>> +++ b/mm/memcontrol.c
>> @@ -664,24 +664,20 @@ static unsigned long mem_cgroup_read_events(struct mem_cgroup *mem,
>>  static void mem_cgroup_charge_statistics(struct mem_cgroup *mem,
>>                                        bool file, int nr_pages)
>>  {
>> -     preempt_disable();
>> -
>>       if (file)
>> -             __this_cpu_add(mem->stat->count[MEM_CGROUP_STAT_CACHE], nr_pages);
>> +             this_cpu_add(mem->stat->count[MEM_CGROUP_STAT_CACHE], nr_pages);
>>       else
>> -             __this_cpu_add(mem->stat->count[MEM_CGROUP_STAT_RSS], nr_pages);
>> +             this_cpu_add(mem->stat->count[MEM_CGROUP_STAT_RSS], nr_pages);
>>
>>       /* pagein of a big page is an event. So, ignore page size */
>>       if (nr_pages > 0)
>> -             __this_cpu_inc(mem->stat->events[MEM_CGROUP_EVENTS_PGPGIN]);
>> +             this_cpu_inc(mem->stat->events[MEM_CGROUP_EVENTS_PGPGIN]);
>>       else {
>> -             __this_cpu_inc(mem->stat->events[MEM_CGROUP_EVENTS_PGPGOUT]);
>> +             this_cpu_inc(mem->stat->events[MEM_CGROUP_EVENTS_PGPGOUT]);
>>               nr_pages = -nr_pages; /* for event */
>>       }
>>
>> -     __this_cpu_add(mem->stat->events[MEM_CGROUP_EVENTS_COUNT], nr_pages);
>> -
>> -     preempt_enable();
>> +     this_cpu_add(mem->stat->events[MEM_CGROUP_EVENTS_COUNT], nr_pages);
>>  }
>
> On non-x86 architectures this_cpu_add() internally does
> preempt_disable() and preempt_enable().  So the patch is a small
> optimisation for x86 and a larger deoptimisation for non-x86.
>
> I think I'll apply it, as the call frequency is low (correct?) and the
> problem will correct itself as other architectures implement their
> atomic this_cpu_foo() operations.

mem_cgroup_charge_statistics() is a common operation, which is called
on each memcg page charge and uncharge.

The per arch/config effects of this patch:
* non-preemptible kernels: there's no difference before/after this patch.
* preemptible x86: this patch helps by removing an unnecessary
preempt_disable/enable.
* preemptible non-x86: this patch hurts by adding implicit
preempt_disable/enable around each operation.

So I am uncomfortable this patch's unmeasured impact on archs that do
not have atomic this_cpu_foo() operations.  Please drop the patch from
mmotm.  Sorry for the noise.
--
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/