linux-kernel - [PATCH 16/17] mem/memcg: cache rightmost node

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 for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket

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

Date:   Tue, 18 Jul 2017 18:46:02 -0700
From:   Davidlohr Bueso <dave@...olabs.net>
To:     akpm@...ux-foundation.org
Cc:     mingo@...nel.org, peterz@...radead.org, jack@...e.cz,
        torvalds@...ux-foundation.org, kirill.shutemov@...ux.intel.com,
        hch@...radead.org, ldufour@...ux.vnet.ibm.com, mhocko@...e.com,
        mgorman@...hsingularity.net, dave@...olabs.net,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, Davidlohr Bueso <dbueso@...e.de>
Subject: [PATCH 16/17] mem/memcg: cache rightmost node

Such that we can optimize __mem_cgroup_largest_soft_limit_node().
The only overhead is the extra footprint for the cached pointer,
but this should not be an issue for mem_cgroup_tree_per_node.

Signed-off-by: Davidlohr Bueso <dbueso@...e.de>
---
 mm/memcontrol.c | 23 ++++++++++++++++++-----
 1 file changed, 18 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-)

diff --git a/mm/memcontrol.c b/mm/memcontrol.c
index 3df3c04d73ab..2ef9328ace2e 100644
--- a/mm/memcontrol.c
+++ b/mm/memcontrol.c
@@ -119,6 +119,7 @@ static const char *const mem_cgroup_lru_names[] = {
 
 struct mem_cgroup_tree_per_node {
 	struct rb_root rb_root;
+	struct rb_node *rb_rightmost;
 	spinlock_t lock;
 };
 
@@ -386,6 +387,7 @@ static void __mem_cgroup_insert_exceeded(struct mem_cgroup_per_node *mz,
 	struct rb_node **p = &mctz->rb_root.rb_node;
 	struct rb_node *parent = NULL;
 	struct mem_cgroup_per_node *mz_node;
+	bool rightmost = true;
 
 	if (mz->on_tree)
 		return;
@@ -397,8 +399,11 @@ static void __mem_cgroup_insert_exceeded(struct mem_cgroup_per_node *mz,
 		parent = *p;
 		mz_node = rb_entry(parent, struct mem_cgroup_per_node,
 					tree_node);
-		if (mz->usage_in_excess < mz_node->usage_in_excess)
+		if (mz->usage_in_excess < mz_node->usage_in_excess) {
 			p = &(*p)->rb_left;
+			rightmost = false;
+		}
+
 		/*
 		 * We can't avoid mem cgroups that are over their soft
 		 * limit by the same amount
@@ -406,6 +411,10 @@ static void __mem_cgroup_insert_exceeded(struct mem_cgroup_per_node *mz,
 		else if (mz->usage_in_excess >= mz_node->usage_in_excess)
 			p = &(*p)->rb_right;
 	}
+
+	if (rightmost)
+		mctz->rb_rightmost = &mz->tree_node;
+
 	rb_link_node(&mz->tree_node, parent, p);
 	rb_insert_color(&mz->tree_node, &mctz->rb_root);
 	mz->on_tree = true;
@@ -416,6 +425,10 @@ static void __mem_cgroup_remove_exceeded(struct mem_cgroup_per_node *mz,
 {
 	if (!mz->on_tree)
 		return;
+
+	if (&mz->tree_node == mctz->rb_rightmost)
+		mctz->rb_rightmost = rb_next(&mz->tree_node);
+
 	rb_erase(&mz->tree_node, &mctz->rb_root);
 	mz->on_tree = false;
 }
@@ -496,16 +509,15 @@ static void mem_cgroup_remove_from_trees(struct mem_cgroup *memcg)
 static struct mem_cgroup_per_node *
 __mem_cgroup_largest_soft_limit_node(struct mem_cgroup_tree_per_node *mctz)
 {
-	struct rb_node *rightmost = NULL;
 	struct mem_cgroup_per_node *mz;
 
 retry:
 	mz = NULL;
-	rightmost = rb_last(&mctz->rb_root);
-	if (!rightmost)
+	if (!mctz->rb_rightmost)
 		goto done;		/* Nothing to reclaim from */
 
-	mz = rb_entry(rightmost, struct mem_cgroup_per_node, tree_node);
+	mz = rb_entry(mctz->rb_rightmost,
+		      struct mem_cgroup_per_node, tree_node);
 	/*
 	 * Remove the node now but someone else can add it back,
 	 * we will to add it back at the end of reclaim to its correct
@@ -5850,6 +5862,7 @@ static int __init mem_cgroup_init(void)
 				    node_online(node) ? node : NUMA_NO_NODE);
 
 		rtpn->rb_root = RB_ROOT;
+		rtpn->rb_rightmost = NULL;
 		spin_lock_init(&rtpn->lock);
 		soft_limit_tree.rb_tree_per_node[node] = rtpn;
 	}
-- 
2.12.0