| 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: <1340633728-12785-10-git-send-email-glommer@parallels.com>
Date: Mon, 25 Jun 2012 18:15:26 +0400
From: Glauber Costa <glommer@...allels.com>
To: <cgroups@...r.kernel.org>
Cc: <linux-mm@...ck.org>, Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
<linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Frederic Weisbecker <fweisbec@...il.com>,
David Rientjes <rientjes@...gle.com>,
Pekka Enberg <penberg@...nel.org>,
Michal Hocko <mhocko@...e.cz>,
Johannes Weiner <hannes@...xchg.org>,
Christoph Lameter <cl@...ux.com>, <devel@...nvz.org>,
<kamezawa.hiroyu@...fujitsu.com>, Tejun Heo <tj@...nel.org>,
Glauber Costa <glommer@...allels.com>,
Pekka Enberg <penberg@...helsinki.fi>,
Suleiman Souhlal <suleiman@...gle.com>
Subject: [PATCH 09/11] memcg: propagate kmem limiting information to children
The current memcg slab cache management fails to present satisfatory hierarchical
behavior in the following scenario:
-> /cgroups/memory/A/B/C
* kmem limit set at A
* A and B empty taskwise
* bash in C does find /
Because kmem_accounted is a boolean that was not set for C, no accounting
would be done. This is, however, not what we expect.
The basic idea, is that when a cgroup is limited, we walk the tree
upwards (something Kame and I already thought about doing for other purposes),
and make sure that we store the information about the parent being limited in
kmem_accounted (that is turned into a bitmap: two booleans would not be space
efficient). The code for that is taken from sched/core.c. My reasons for not
putting it into a common place is to dodge the type issues that would arise
from a common implementation between memcg and the scheduler - but I think
that it should ultimately happen, so if you want me to do it now, let me
know.
We do the reverse operation when a formerly limited cgroup becomes unlimited.
Signed-off-by: Glauber Costa <glommer@...allels.com>
CC: Christoph Lameter <cl@...ux.com>
CC: Pekka Enberg <penberg@...helsinki.fi>
CC: Michal Hocko <mhocko@...e.cz>
CC: Kamezawa Hiroyuki <kamezawa.hiroyu@...fujitsu.com>
CC: Johannes Weiner <hannes@...xchg.org>
CC: Suleiman Souhlal <suleiman@...gle.com>
---
mm/memcontrol.c | 86 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++----------
1 file changed, 71 insertions(+), 15 deletions(-)
diff --git a/mm/memcontrol.c b/mm/memcontrol.c
index fe5388e..a6a440b 100644
--- a/mm/memcontrol.c
+++ b/mm/memcontrol.c
@@ -287,7 +287,11 @@ struct mem_cgroup {
* Should the accounting and control be hierarchical, per subtree?
*/
bool use_hierarchy;
- bool kmem_accounted;
+ /*
+ * bit0: accounted by this cgroup
+ * bit1: accounted by a parent.
+ */
+ volatile unsigned long kmem_accounted;
bool oom_lock;
atomic_t under_oom;
@@ -340,6 +344,9 @@ struct mem_cgroup {
#endif
};
+#define KMEM_ACCOUNTED_THIS 0
+#define KMEM_ACCOUNTED_PARENT 1
+
/* Stuffs for move charges at task migration. */
/*
* Types of charges to be moved. "move_charge_at_immitgrate" is treated as a
@@ -589,7 +596,7 @@ EXPORT_SYMBOL(__mem_cgroup_free_kmem_page);
static void disarm_kmem_keys(struct mem_cgroup *memcg)
{
- if (memcg->kmem_accounted)
+ if (test_bit(KMEM_ACCOUNTED_THIS, &memcg->kmem_accounted))
static_key_slow_dec(&mem_cgroup_kmem_enabled_key);
}
#else
@@ -4027,6 +4034,66 @@ static ssize_t mem_cgroup_read(struct cgroup *cont, struct cftype *cft,
len = scnprintf(str, sizeof(str), "%llu\n", (unsigned long long)val);
return simple_read_from_buffer(buf, nbytes, ppos, str, len);
}
+
+#ifdef CONFIG_CGROUP_MEM_RES_CTLR_KMEM
+static void mem_cgroup_update_kmem_limit(struct mem_cgroup *memcg, u64 val)
+{
+ struct mem_cgroup *iter;
+
+ mutex_lock(&set_limit_mutex);
+ if (!test_and_set_bit(KMEM_ACCOUNTED_THIS, &memcg->kmem_accounted) &&
+ val != RESOURCE_MAX) {
+
+ /*
+ * Once enabled, can't be disabled. We could in theory
+ * disable it if we haven't yet created any caches, or
+ * if we can shrink them all to death.
+ *
+ * But it is not worth the trouble
+ */
+ static_key_slow_inc(&mem_cgroup_kmem_enabled_key);
+
+ if (!memcg->use_hierarchy)
+ goto out;
+
+ for_each_mem_cgroup_tree(iter, memcg) {
+ if (iter == memcg)
+ continue;
+ set_bit(KMEM_ACCOUNTED_PARENT, &iter->kmem_accounted);
+ }
+
+ } else if (test_and_clear_bit(KMEM_ACCOUNTED_THIS, &memcg->kmem_accounted)
+ && val == RESOURCE_MAX) {
+
+ if (!memcg->use_hierarchy)
+ goto out;
+
+ for_each_mem_cgroup_tree(iter, memcg) {
+ struct mem_cgroup *parent;
+ if (iter == memcg)
+ continue;
+ /*
+ * We should only have our parent bit cleared if none of
+ * ouri parents are accounted. The transversal order of
+ * our iter function forces us to always look at the
+ * parents.
+ */
+ parent = parent_mem_cgroup(iter);
+ while (parent && (parent != memcg)) {
+ if (test_bit(KMEM_ACCOUNTED_THIS, &parent->kmem_accounted))
+ goto noclear;
+
+ parent = parent_mem_cgroup(parent);
+ }
+ clear_bit(KMEM_ACCOUNTED_PARENT, &iter->kmem_accounted);
+noclear:
+ continue;
+ }
+ }
+out:
+ mutex_unlock(&set_limit_mutex);
+}
+#endif
/*
* The user of this function is...
* RES_LIMIT.
@@ -4064,19 +4131,8 @@ static int mem_cgroup_write(struct cgroup *cont, struct cftype *cft,
ret = res_counter_set_limit(&memcg->kmem, val);
if (ret)
break;
- /*
- * Once enabled, can't be disabled. We could in theory
- * disable it if we haven't yet created any caches, or
- * if we can shrink them all to death.
- *
- * But it is not worth the trouble
- */
- mutex_lock(&set_limit_mutex);
- if (!memcg->kmem_accounted && val != RESOURCE_MAX) {
- static_key_slow_inc(&mem_cgroup_kmem_enabled_key);
- memcg->kmem_accounted = true;
- }
- mutex_unlock(&set_limit_mutex);
+ mem_cgroup_update_kmem_limit(memcg, val);
+ break;
}
#endif
else
--
1.7.10.2
--
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