| 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: <20191002084304.GI15624@dhcp22.suse.cz>
Date: Wed, 2 Oct 2019 10:43:04 +0200
From: Michal Hocko <mhocko@...nel.org>
To: Yang Shi <yang.shi@...ux.alibaba.com>
Cc: kirill.shutemov@...ux.intel.com, ktkhai@...tuozzo.com,
hannes@...xchg.org, hughd@...gle.com, shakeelb@...gle.com,
rientjes@...gle.com, akpm@...ux-foundation.org, linux-mm@...ck.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] mm: thp: move deferred split queue to memcg's nodeinfo
On Wed 02-10-19 06:16:43, Yang Shi wrote:
> The commit 87eaceb3faa59b9b4d940ec9554ce251325d83fe ("mm: thp: make
> deferred split shrinker memcg aware") makes deferred split queue per
> memcg to resolve memcg pre-mature OOM problem. But, all nodes end up
> sharing the same queue instead of one queue per-node before the commit.
> It is not a big deal for memcg limit reclaim, but it may cause global
> kswapd shrink THPs from a different node.
>
> And, 0-day testing reported -19.6% regression of stress-ng's madvise
> test [1]. I didn't see that much regression on my test box (24 threads,
> 48GB memory, 2 nodes), with the same test (stress-ng --timeout 1
> --metrics-brief --sequential 72 --class vm --exclude spawn,exec), I saw
> average -3% (run the same test 10 times then calculate the average since
> the test itself may have most 15% variation according to my test)
> regression sometimes (not every time, sometimes I didn't see regression
> at all).
>
> This might be caused by deferred split queue lock contention. With some
> configuration (i.e. just one root memcg) the lock contention my be worse
> than before (given 2 nodes, two locks are reduced to one lock).
>
> So, moving deferred split queue to memcg's nodeinfo to make it NUMA
> aware again.
>
> With this change stress-ng's madvise test shows average 4% improvement
> sometimes and I didn't see degradation anymore.
My concern about this getting more and more complex
(http://lkml.kernel.org/r/20191002084014.GH15624@dhcp22.suse.cz) holds
here even more. Can we step back and reconsider the whole thing please?
> [1]: https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/20190930084604.GC17687@shao2-debian/
>
> Cc: Kirill A. Shutemov <kirill.shutemov@...ux.intel.com>
> Cc: Kirill Tkhai <ktkhai@...tuozzo.com>
> Cc: Johannes Weiner <hannes@...xchg.org>
> Cc: Michal Hocko <mhocko@...e.com>
> Cc: Hugh Dickins <hughd@...gle.com>
> Cc: Shakeel Butt <shakeelb@...gle.com>
> Cc: David Rientjes <rientjes@...gle.com>
> Signed-off-by: Yang Shi <yang.shi@...ux.alibaba.com>
> ---
> include/linux/memcontrol.h | 8 ++++----
> mm/huge_memory.c | 15 +++++++++------
> mm/memcontrol.c | 29 +++++++++++++++++------------
> 3 files changed, 30 insertions(+), 22 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/include/linux/memcontrol.h b/include/linux/memcontrol.h
> index 9b60863..4b5c791 100644
> --- a/include/linux/memcontrol.h
> +++ b/include/linux/memcontrol.h
> @@ -137,6 +137,10 @@ struct mem_cgroup_per_node {
> bool congested; /* memcg has many dirty pages */
> /* backed by a congested BDI */
>
> +#ifdef CONFIG_TRANSPARENT_HUGEPAGE
> + struct deferred_split deferred_split_queue;
> +#endif
> +
> struct mem_cgroup *memcg; /* Back pointer, we cannot */
> /* use container_of */
> };
> @@ -330,10 +334,6 @@ struct mem_cgroup {
> struct list_head event_list;
> spinlock_t event_list_lock;
>
> -#ifdef CONFIG_TRANSPARENT_HUGEPAGE
> - struct deferred_split deferred_split_queue;
> -#endif
> -
> struct mem_cgroup_per_node *nodeinfo[0];
> /* WARNING: nodeinfo must be the last member here */
> };
> diff --git a/mm/huge_memory.c b/mm/huge_memory.c
> index c5cb6dc..3b78910 100644
> --- a/mm/huge_memory.c
> +++ b/mm/huge_memory.c
> @@ -500,10 +500,11 @@ pmd_t maybe_pmd_mkwrite(pmd_t pmd, struct vm_area_struct *vma)
> static inline struct deferred_split *get_deferred_split_queue(struct page *page)
> {
> struct mem_cgroup *memcg = compound_head(page)->mem_cgroup;
> - struct pglist_data *pgdat = NODE_DATA(page_to_nid(page));
> + int nid = page_to_nid(page);
> + struct pglist_data *pgdat = NODE_DATA(nid);
>
> if (memcg)
> - return &memcg->deferred_split_queue;
> + return &memcg->nodeinfo[nid]->deferred_split_queue;
> else
> return &pgdat->deferred_split_queue;
> }
> @@ -2882,12 +2883,13 @@ void deferred_split_huge_page(struct page *page)
> static unsigned long deferred_split_count(struct shrinker *shrink,
> struct shrink_control *sc)
> {
> - struct pglist_data *pgdata = NODE_DATA(sc->nid);
> + int nid = sc->nid;
> + struct pglist_data *pgdata = NODE_DATA(nid);
> struct deferred_split *ds_queue = &pgdata->deferred_split_queue;
>
> #ifdef CONFIG_MEMCG
> if (sc->memcg)
> - ds_queue = &sc->memcg->deferred_split_queue;
> + ds_queue = &sc->memcg->nodeinfo[nid]->deferred_split_queue;
> #endif
> return READ_ONCE(ds_queue->split_queue_len);
> }
> @@ -2895,7 +2897,8 @@ static unsigned long deferred_split_count(struct shrinker *shrink,
> static unsigned long deferred_split_scan(struct shrinker *shrink,
> struct shrink_control *sc)
> {
> - struct pglist_data *pgdata = NODE_DATA(sc->nid);
> + int nid = sc->nid;
> + struct pglist_data *pgdata = NODE_DATA(nid);
> struct deferred_split *ds_queue = &pgdata->deferred_split_queue;
> unsigned long flags;
> LIST_HEAD(list), *pos, *next;
> @@ -2904,7 +2907,7 @@ static unsigned long deferred_split_scan(struct shrinker *shrink,
>
> #ifdef CONFIG_MEMCG
> if (sc->memcg)
> - ds_queue = &sc->memcg->deferred_split_queue;
> + ds_queue = &sc->memcg->nodeinfo[nid]->deferred_split_queue;
> #endif
>
> spin_lock_irqsave(&ds_queue->split_queue_lock, flags);
> diff --git a/mm/memcontrol.c b/mm/memcontrol.c
> index c313c49..19d4295 100644
> --- a/mm/memcontrol.c
> +++ b/mm/memcontrol.c
> @@ -4989,6 +4989,12 @@ static int alloc_mem_cgroup_per_node_info(struct mem_cgroup *memcg, int node)
> pn->on_tree = false;
> pn->memcg = memcg;
>
> +#ifdef CONFIG_TRANSPARENT_HUGEPAGE
> + spin_lock_init(&pn->deferred_split_queue.split_queue_lock);
> + INIT_LIST_HEAD(&pn->deferred_split_queue.split_queue);
> + pn->deferred_split_queue.split_queue_len = 0;
> +#endif
> +
> memcg->nodeinfo[node] = pn;
> return 0;
> }
> @@ -5081,11 +5087,6 @@ static struct mem_cgroup *mem_cgroup_alloc(void)
> memcg->cgwb_frn[i].done =
> __WB_COMPLETION_INIT(&memcg_cgwb_frn_waitq);
> #endif
> -#ifdef CONFIG_TRANSPARENT_HUGEPAGE
> - spin_lock_init(&memcg->deferred_split_queue.split_queue_lock);
> - INIT_LIST_HEAD(&memcg->deferred_split_queue.split_queue);
> - memcg->deferred_split_queue.split_queue_len = 0;
> -#endif
> idr_replace(&mem_cgroup_idr, memcg, memcg->id.id);
> return memcg;
> fail:
> @@ -5419,6 +5420,8 @@ static int mem_cgroup_move_account(struct page *page,
> unsigned int nr_pages = compound ? hpage_nr_pages(page) : 1;
> int ret;
> bool anon;
> + struct deferred_split *ds_queue;
> + int nid = page_to_nid(page);
>
> VM_BUG_ON(from == to);
> VM_BUG_ON_PAGE(PageLRU(page), page);
> @@ -5466,10 +5469,11 @@ static int mem_cgroup_move_account(struct page *page,
>
> #ifdef CONFIG_TRANSPARENT_HUGEPAGE
> if (compound && !list_empty(page_deferred_list(page))) {
> - spin_lock(&from->deferred_split_queue.split_queue_lock);
> + ds_queue = &from->nodeinfo[nid]->deferred_split_queue;
> + spin_lock(&ds_queue->split_queue_lock);
> list_del_init(page_deferred_list(page));
> - from->deferred_split_queue.split_queue_len--;
> - spin_unlock(&from->deferred_split_queue.split_queue_lock);
> + ds_queue->split_queue_len--;
> + spin_unlock(&ds_queue->split_queue_lock);
> }
> #endif
> /*
> @@ -5483,11 +5487,12 @@ static int mem_cgroup_move_account(struct page *page,
>
> #ifdef CONFIG_TRANSPARENT_HUGEPAGE
> if (compound && list_empty(page_deferred_list(page))) {
> - spin_lock(&to->deferred_split_queue.split_queue_lock);
> + ds_queue = &to->nodeinfo[nid]->deferred_split_queue;
> + spin_lock(&ds_queue->split_queue_lock);
> list_add_tail(page_deferred_list(page),
> - &to->deferred_split_queue.split_queue);
> - to->deferred_split_queue.split_queue_len++;
> - spin_unlock(&to->deferred_split_queue.split_queue_lock);
> + &ds_queue->split_queue);
> + ds_queue->split_queue_len++;
> + spin_unlock(&ds_queue->split_queue_lock);
> }
> #endif
>
> --
> 1.8.3.1
--
Michal Hocko
SUSE Labs
Powered by blists - more mailing lists