linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 4/4] writeback, memcg: Implement foreign dirty flushing

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]

Date:   Tue, 6 Aug 2019 16:03:06 -0700
From:   Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>
To:     Tejun Heo <tj@...nel.org>
Cc:     axboe@...nel.dk, jack@...e.cz, hannes@...xchg.org,
        mhocko@...nel.org, vdavydov.dev@...il.com, cgroups@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-mm@...ck.org, linux-block@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, kernel-team@...com, guro@...com
Subject: Re: [PATCH 4/4] writeback, memcg: Implement foreign dirty flushing

On Sat,  3 Aug 2019 07:01:55 -0700 Tejun Heo <tj@...nel.org> wrote:

> There's an inherent mismatch between memcg and writeback.  The former
> trackes ownership per-page while the latter per-inode.  This was a
> deliberate design decision because honoring per-page ownership in the
> writeback path is complicated, may lead to higher CPU and IO overheads
> and deemed unnecessary given that write-sharing an inode across
> different cgroups isn't a common use-case.
> 
> Combined with inode majority-writer ownership switching, this works
> well enough in most cases but there are some pathological cases.  For
> example, let's say there are two cgroups A and B which keep writing to
> different but confined parts of the same inode.  B owns the inode and
> A's memory is limited far below B's.  A's dirty ratio can rise enough
> to trigger balance_dirty_pages() sleeps but B's can be low enough to
> avoid triggering background writeback.  A will be slowed down without
> a way to make writeback of the dirty pages happen.
> 
> This patch implements foreign dirty recording and foreign mechanism so
> that when a memcg encounters a condition as above it can trigger
> flushes on bdi_writebacks which can clean its pages.  Please see the
> comment on top of mem_cgroup_track_foreign_dirty_slowpath() for
> details.
> 
> ...
>
> +void mem_cgroup_track_foreign_dirty_slowpath(struct page *page,
> +					     struct bdi_writeback *wb)
> +{
> +	struct mem_cgroup *memcg = page->mem_cgroup;
> +	struct memcg_cgwb_frn *frn;
> +	u64 now = jiffies_64;
> +	u64 oldest_at = now;
> +	int oldest = -1;
> +	int i;
> +
> +	/*
> +	 * Pick the slot to use.  If there is already a slot for @wb, keep
> +	 * using it.  If not replace the oldest one which isn't being
> +	 * written out.
> +	 */
> +	for (i = 0; i < MEMCG_CGWB_FRN_CNT; i++) {
> +		frn = &memcg->cgwb_frn[i];
> +		if (frn->bdi_id == wb->bdi->id &&
> +		    frn->memcg_id == wb->memcg_css->id)
> +			break;
> +		if (frn->at < oldest_at && atomic_read(&frn->done.cnt) == 1) {
> +			oldest = i;
> +			oldest_at = frn->at;
> +		}
> +	}
> +
> +	if (i < MEMCG_CGWB_FRN_CNT) {
> +		unsigned long update_intv =
> +			min_t(unsigned long, HZ,
> +			      msecs_to_jiffies(dirty_expire_interval * 10) / 8);

An explanation of what's going on here would be helpful.

Why "* 1.25" and not, umm "* 1.24"?

> +		/*
> +		 * Re-using an existing one.  Let's update timestamp lazily
> +		 * to avoid making the cacheline hot.
> +		 */
> +		if (frn->at < now - update_intv)
> +			frn->at = now;
> +	} else if (oldest >= 0) {
> +		/* replace the oldest free one */
> +		frn = &memcg->cgwb_frn[oldest];
> +		frn->bdi_id = wb->bdi->id;
> +		frn->memcg_id = wb->memcg_css->id;
> +		frn->at = now;
> +	}
> +}
> +
> +/*
> + * Issue foreign writeback flushes for recorded foreign dirtying events
> + * which haven't expired yet and aren't already being written out.
> + */
> +void mem_cgroup_flush_foreign(struct bdi_writeback *wb)
> +{
> +	struct mem_cgroup *memcg = mem_cgroup_from_css(wb->memcg_css);
> +	unsigned long intv = msecs_to_jiffies(dirty_expire_interval * 10);

Ditto.

> +	u64 now = jiffies_64;
> +	int i;
> +
> +	for (i = 0; i < MEMCG_CGWB_FRN_CNT; i++) {
> +		struct memcg_cgwb_frn *frn = &memcg->cgwb_frn[i];
> +
> +		if (frn->at > now - intv && atomic_read(&frn->done.cnt) == 1) {
> +			frn->at = 0;
> +			cgroup_writeback_by_id(frn->bdi_id, frn->memcg_id,
> +					       LONG_MAX, WB_REASON_FOREIGN_FLUSH,
> +					       &frn->done);
> +		}
> +	}
> +}
> +