[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <YH/Vf8SDRy7VR7ur@dhcp22.suse.cz>
Date: Wed, 21 Apr 2021 09:34:23 +0200
From: Michal Hocko <mhocko@...e.com>
To: Muchun Song <songmuchun@...edance.com>
Cc: guro@...com, hannes@...xchg.org, akpm@...ux-foundation.org,
shakeelb@...gle.com, vdavydov.dev@...il.com,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-mm@...ck.org,
duanxiongchun@...edance.com, fam.zheng@...edance.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH] mm: memcontrol: fix root_mem_cgroup charging
On Wed 21-04-21 14:26:44, Muchun Song wrote:
> The below scenario can cause the page counters of the root_mem_cgroup
> to be out of balance.
>
> CPU0: CPU1:
>
> objcg = get_obj_cgroup_from_current()
> obj_cgroup_charge_pages(objcg)
> memcg_reparent_objcgs()
> // reparent to root_mem_cgroup
> WRITE_ONCE(iter->memcg, parent)
> // memcg == root_mem_cgroup
> memcg = get_mem_cgroup_from_objcg(objcg)
> // do not charge to the root_mem_cgroup
> try_charge(memcg)
>
> obj_cgroup_uncharge_pages(objcg)
> memcg = get_mem_cgroup_from_objcg(objcg)
> // uncharge from the root_mem_cgroup
> page_counter_uncharge(&memcg->memory)
>
> This can cause the page counter to be less than the actual value,
> Although we do not display the value (mem_cgroup_usage) so there
> shouldn't be any actual problem, but there is a WARN_ON_ONCE in
> the page_counter_cancel(). Who knows if it will trigger? So it
> is better to fix it.
The changelog doesn't explain the fix and why you have chosen to charge
kmem objects to root memcg and left all other try_charge users intact.
The reason is likely that those are not reparented now but that just
adds an inconsistency.
Is there any reason you haven't simply matched obj_cgroup_uncharge_pages
to check for the root memcg and bail out early?
> Signed-off-by: Muchun Song <songmuchun@...edance.com>
> ---
> mm/memcontrol.c | 17 ++++++++++++-----
> 1 file changed, 12 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/mm/memcontrol.c b/mm/memcontrol.c
> index 1e68a9992b01..81b54bd9b9e0 100644
> --- a/mm/memcontrol.c
> +++ b/mm/memcontrol.c
> @@ -2686,8 +2686,8 @@ void mem_cgroup_handle_over_high(void)
> css_put(&memcg->css);
> }
>
> -static int try_charge(struct mem_cgroup *memcg, gfp_t gfp_mask,
> - unsigned int nr_pages)
> +static int __try_charge(struct mem_cgroup *memcg, gfp_t gfp_mask,
> + unsigned int nr_pages)
> {
> unsigned int batch = max(MEMCG_CHARGE_BATCH, nr_pages);
> int nr_retries = MAX_RECLAIM_RETRIES;
> @@ -2699,8 +2699,6 @@ static int try_charge(struct mem_cgroup *memcg, gfp_t gfp_mask,
> bool drained = false;
> unsigned long pflags;
>
> - if (mem_cgroup_is_root(memcg))
> - return 0;
> retry:
> if (consume_stock(memcg, nr_pages))
> return 0;
> @@ -2880,6 +2878,15 @@ static int try_charge(struct mem_cgroup *memcg, gfp_t gfp_mask,
> return 0;
> }
>
> +static inline int try_charge(struct mem_cgroup *memcg, gfp_t gfp_mask,
> + unsigned int nr_pages)
> +{
> + if (mem_cgroup_is_root(memcg))
> + return 0;
> +
> + return __try_charge(memcg, gfp_mask, nr_pages);
> +}
> +
> #if defined(CONFIG_MEMCG_KMEM) || defined(CONFIG_MMU)
> static void cancel_charge(struct mem_cgroup *memcg, unsigned int nr_pages)
> {
> @@ -3125,7 +3132,7 @@ static int obj_cgroup_charge_pages(struct obj_cgroup *objcg, gfp_t gfp,
>
> memcg = get_mem_cgroup_from_objcg(objcg);
>
> - ret = try_charge(memcg, gfp, nr_pages);
> + ret = __try_charge(memcg, gfp, nr_pages);
> if (ret)
> goto out;
>
> --
> 2.11.0
--
Michal Hocko
SUSE Labs
Powered by blists - more mailing lists