| 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: <CAHbLzkoHSxZp0e6-xnOUdexXVmb5ORwQnjVugy9pEtwLuyAihg@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Mon, 25 Jan 2021 13:16:47 -0800
From: Yang Shi <shy828301@...il.com>
To: Kirill Tkhai <ktkhai@...tuozzo.com>
Cc: Roman Gushchin <guro@...com>, Shakeel Butt <shakeelb@...gle.com>,
Dave Chinner <david@...morbit.com>,
Johannes Weiner <hannes@...xchg.org>,
Michal Hocko <mhocko@...e.com>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
Linux MM <linux-mm@...ck.org>,
Linux FS-devel Mailing List <linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org>,
Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [v4 PATCH 08/11] mm: vmscan: use per memcg nr_deferred of shrinker
On Mon, Jan 25, 2021 at 1:35 AM Kirill Tkhai <ktkhai@...tuozzo.com> wrote:
>
> On 22.01.2021 02:06, Yang Shi wrote:
> > Use per memcg's nr_deferred for memcg aware shrinkers. The shrinker's nr_deferred
> > will be used in the following cases:
> > 1. Non memcg aware shrinkers
> > 2. !CONFIG_MEMCG
> > 3. memcg is disabled by boot parameter
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Yang Shi <shy828301@...il.com>
> > ---
> > mm/vmscan.c | 81 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++--------
> > 1 file changed, 69 insertions(+), 12 deletions(-)
> >
> > diff --git a/mm/vmscan.c b/mm/vmscan.c
> > index 722aa71b13b2..d8e77ea13815 100644
> > --- a/mm/vmscan.c
> > +++ b/mm/vmscan.c
> > @@ -359,6 +359,27 @@ static void unregister_memcg_shrinker(struct shrinker *shrinker)
> > up_write(&shrinker_rwsem);
> > }
> >
> > +static long count_nr_deferred_memcg(int nid, struct shrinker *shrinker,
> > + struct mem_cgroup *memcg)
> > +{
> > + struct shrinker_info *info;
> > +
> > + info = rcu_dereference_protected(memcg->nodeinfo[nid]->shrinker_info,
> > + true);
>
> Since now these rcu_dereference_protected() are in separate functions and there is
> no taking a lock near them, it seems it would be better to underling the desired
> lock with rcu_dereference_protected(, lockdep_assert_held(lock_you_need_here_locked));
Sure. Will incorporate in v5. BTW I noticed using
lockdep_assert_held() in the parameter of the functions will result in
compilation failure with gcc 10.0.1 (shipped with Fedora 32), but fine
with gcc 8.3.1.
In file included from ./include/linux/rbtree.h:22,
from ./include/linux/mm_types.h:10,
from ./include/linux/mmzone.h:21,
from ./include/linux/gfp.h:6,
from ./include/linux/mm.h:10,
from mm/vmscan.c:15:
mm/vmscan.c: In function ‘shrinker_info_protected’:
./include/linux/lockdep.h:386:34: error: expected expression before ‘do’
386 | #define lockdep_assert_held(l) do { (void)(l); } while (0)
| ^~
./include/linux/rcupdate.h:337:52: note: in definition of macro
‘RCU_LOCKDEP_WARN’
337 | #define RCU_LOCKDEP_WARN(c, s) do { } while (0 && (c))
| ^
./include/linux/rcupdate.h:554:2: note: in expansion of macro
‘__rcu_dereference_protected’
554 | __rcu_dereference_protected((p), (c), __rcu)
| ^~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
mm/vmscan.c:389:9: note: in expansion of macro ‘rcu_dereference_protected’
389 | return rcu_dereference_protected(memcg->nodeinfo[nid]->shrinker_info,
| ^~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
mm/vmscan.c:390:7: note: in expansion of macro ‘lockdep_assert_held’
390 | lockdep_assert_held(&shrinker_rwsem));
| ^~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
I didn't dig into the root cause. Just use lockdep_is_held() instead
of lockdep_assert_held().
>
>
> > + return atomic_long_xchg(&info->nr_deferred[shrinker->id], 0);
> > +}
> > +
> > +static long set_nr_deferred_memcg(long nr, int nid, struct shrinker *shrinker,
> > + struct mem_cgroup *memcg)
> > +{
> > + struct shrinker_info *info;
> > +
> > + info = rcu_dereference_protected(memcg->nodeinfo[nid]->shrinker_info,
> > + true);
> > +
> > + return atomic_long_add_return(nr, &info->nr_deferred[shrinker->id]);
> > +}
> > +
> > static bool cgroup_reclaim(struct scan_control *sc)
> > {
> > return sc->target_mem_cgroup;
> > @@ -397,6 +418,18 @@ static void unregister_memcg_shrinker(struct shrinker *shrinker)
> > {
> > }
> >
> > +static long count_nr_deferred_memcg(int nid, struct shrinker *shrinker,
> > + struct mem_cgroup *memcg)
> > +{
> > + return 0;
> > +}
> > +
> > +static long set_nr_deferred_memcg(long nr, int nid, struct shrinker *shrinker,
> > + struct mem_cgroup *memcg)
> > +{
> > + return 0;
> > +}
> > +
> > static bool cgroup_reclaim(struct scan_control *sc)
> > {
> > return false;
> > @@ -408,6 +441,39 @@ static bool writeback_throttling_sane(struct scan_control *sc)
> > }
> > #endif
> >
> > +static long count_nr_deferred(struct shrinker *shrinker,
> > + struct shrink_control *sc)
> > +{
> > + int nid = sc->nid;
> > +
> > + if (!(shrinker->flags & SHRINKER_NUMA_AWARE))
> > + nid = 0;
> > +
> > + if (sc->memcg &&
> > + (shrinker->flags & SHRINKER_MEMCG_AWARE))
> > + return count_nr_deferred_memcg(nid, shrinker,
> > + sc->memcg);
> > +
> > + return atomic_long_xchg(&shrinker->nr_deferred[nid], 0);
> > +}
> > +
> > +
> > +static long set_nr_deferred(long nr, struct shrinker *shrinker,
> > + struct shrink_control *sc)
> > +{
> > + int nid = sc->nid;
> > +
> > + if (!(shrinker->flags & SHRINKER_NUMA_AWARE))
> > + nid = 0;
> > +
> > + if (sc->memcg &&
> > + (shrinker->flags & SHRINKER_MEMCG_AWARE))
> > + return set_nr_deferred_memcg(nr, nid, shrinker,
> > + sc->memcg);
> > +
> > + return atomic_long_add_return(nr, &shrinker->nr_deferred[nid]);
> > +}
> > +
> > /*
> > * This misses isolated pages which are not accounted for to save counters.
> > * As the data only determines if reclaim or compaction continues, it is
> > @@ -544,14 +610,10 @@ static unsigned long do_shrink_slab(struct shrink_control *shrinkctl,
> > long freeable;
> > long nr;
> > long new_nr;
> > - int nid = shrinkctl->nid;
> > long batch_size = shrinker->batch ? shrinker->batch
> > : SHRINK_BATCH;
> > long scanned = 0, next_deferred;
> >
> > - if (!(shrinker->flags & SHRINKER_NUMA_AWARE))
> > - nid = 0;
> > -
> > freeable = shrinker->count_objects(shrinker, shrinkctl);
> > if (freeable == 0 || freeable == SHRINK_EMPTY)
> > return freeable;
> > @@ -561,7 +623,7 @@ static unsigned long do_shrink_slab(struct shrink_control *shrinkctl,
> > * and zero it so that other concurrent shrinker invocations
> > * don't also do this scanning work.
> > */
> > - nr = atomic_long_xchg(&shrinker->nr_deferred[nid], 0);
> > + nr = count_nr_deferred(shrinker, shrinkctl);
> >
> > total_scan = nr;
> > if (shrinker->seeks) {
> > @@ -652,14 +714,9 @@ static unsigned long do_shrink_slab(struct shrink_control *shrinkctl,
> > next_deferred = 0;
> > /*
> > * move the unused scan count back into the shrinker in a
> > - * manner that handles concurrent updates. If we exhausted the
> > - * scan, there is no need to do an update.
> > + * manner that handles concurrent updates.
> > */
> > - if (next_deferred > 0)
> > - new_nr = atomic_long_add_return(next_deferred,
> > - &shrinker->nr_deferred[nid]);
> > - else
> > - new_nr = atomic_long_read(&shrinker->nr_deferred[nid]);
> > + new_nr = set_nr_deferred(next_deferred, shrinker, shrinkctl);
> >
> > trace_mm_shrink_slab_end(shrinker, shrinkctl->nid, freed, nr, new_nr, total_scan);
> > return freed;
> >
>
>
Powered by blists - more mailing lists