linux-kernel - [PATCH] memcg: simplify unreclaimable groups handling in soft limit reclaim

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-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <1413820554-15611-1-git-send-email-vdavydov@parallels.com>
Date:	Mon, 20 Oct 2014 19:55:54 +0400
From:	Vladimir Davydov <vdavydov@...allels.com>
To:	Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>
CC:	Johannes Weiner <hannes@...xchg.org>,
	Michal Hocko <mhocko@...e.cz>, <linux-mm@...ck.org>,
	<linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: [PATCH] memcg: simplify unreclaimable groups handling in soft limit reclaim

If we fail to reclaim anything from a cgroup during a soft reclaim pass
we want to get the next largest cgroup exceeding its soft limit. To
achieve this, we should obviously remove the current group from the tree
and then pick the largest group. Currently we have a weird loop instead.
Let's simplify it.

Signed-off-by: Vladimir Davydov <vdavydov@...allels.com>
---
 mm/memcontrol.c |   26 ++++----------------------
 1 file changed, 4 insertions(+), 22 deletions(-)

diff --git a/mm/memcontrol.c b/mm/memcontrol.c
index e957f0c80c6e..53393e27ff03 100644
--- a/mm/memcontrol.c
+++ b/mm/memcontrol.c
@@ -3507,34 +3507,16 @@ unsigned long mem_cgroup_soft_limit_reclaim(struct zone *zone, int order,
 		nr_reclaimed += reclaimed;
 		*total_scanned += nr_scanned;
 		spin_lock_irq(&mctz->lock);
+		__mem_cgroup_remove_exceeded(mz, mctz);
 
 		/*
 		 * If we failed to reclaim anything from this memory cgroup
 		 * it is time to move on to the next cgroup
 		 */
 		next_mz = NULL;
-		if (!reclaimed) {
-			do {
-				/*
-				 * Loop until we find yet another one.
-				 *
-				 * By the time we get the soft_limit lock
-				 * again, someone might have aded the
-				 * group back on the RB tree. Iterate to
-				 * make sure we get a different mem.
-				 * mem_cgroup_largest_soft_limit_node returns
-				 * NULL if no other cgroup is present on
-				 * the tree
-				 */
-				next_mz =
-				__mem_cgroup_largest_soft_limit_node(mctz);
-				if (next_mz == mz)
-					css_put(&next_mz->memcg->css);
-				else /* next_mz == NULL or other memcg */
-					break;
-			} while (1);
-		}
-		__mem_cgroup_remove_exceeded(mz, mctz);
+		if (!reclaimed)
+			next_mz = __mem_cgroup_largest_soft_limit_node(mctz);
+
 		excess = soft_limit_excess(mz->memcg);
 		/*
 		 * One school of thought says that we should not add
-- 
1.7.10.4

--
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/