[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <d767ff72-711d-976c-d897-9cea0375c827@suse.cz>
Date: Mon, 3 May 2021 17:32:24 +0200
From: Vlastimil Babka <vbabka@...e.cz>
To: Waiman Long <llong@...hat.com>,
Johannes Weiner <hannes@...xchg.org>,
Michal Hocko <mhocko@...nel.org>,
Vladimir Davydov <vdavydov.dev@...il.com>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
Christoph Lameter <cl@...ux.com>,
Pekka Enberg <penberg@...nel.org>,
David Rientjes <rientjes@...gle.com>,
Joonsoo Kim <iamjoonsoo.kim@....com>,
Roman Gushchin <guro@...com>,
Shakeel Butt <shakeelb@...gle.com>
Cc: linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, cgroups@...r.kernel.org,
linux-mm@...ck.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/2] mm: memcg/slab: Don't create unfreeable slab
On 5/3/21 4:20 PM, Waiman Long wrote:
> On 5/3/21 8:22 AM, Vlastimil Babka wrote:
>> On 5/2/21 8:07 PM, Waiman Long wrote:
>>> The obj_cgroup array (memcg_data) embedded in the page structure is
>>> allocated at the first instance an accounted memory allocation happens.
>>> With the right size object, it is possible that the allocated obj_cgroup
>>> array comes from the same slab that requires memory accounting. If this
>>> happens, the slab will never become empty again as there is at least one
>>> object left (the obj_cgroup array) in the slab.
>>>
>>> With instructmentation code added to detect this situation, I got 76
>>> hits on the kmalloc-192 slab when booting up a test kernel on a VM.
>>> So this can really happen.
>>>
>>> To avoid the creation of these unfreeable slabs, a check is added to
>>> memcg_alloc_page_obj_cgroups() to detect that and double the size
>>> of the array in case it happens to make sure that it comes from a
>>> different kmemcache.
>>>
>>> This change, however, does not completely eliminate the presence
>>> of unfreeable slabs which can still happen if a circular obj_cgroup
>>> array dependency is formed.
>> Hm this looks like only a half fix then.
>> I'm afraid the proper fix is for kmemcg to create own set of caches for the
>> arrays. It would also solve the recursive kfree() issue.
>
> Right, this is a possible solution. However, the objcg pointers array should
> need that much memory. Creating its own set of kmemcaches may seem like an
> overkill.
Well if we go that way, there might be additional benefits:
depending of gfp flags, kmalloc() would allocate from:
kmalloc-* caches that never have kmemcg objects, thus can be used for the objcg
pointer arrays
kmalloc-cg-* caches that have only kmemcg unreclaimable objects
kmalloc-rcl-* and dma-kmalloc-* can stay with on-demand
memcg_alloc_page_obj_cgroups()
This way we fully solve the issues that this patchset solves. In addition we get
better separation between kmemcg and !kmemcg thus save memory - no allocation of
the array as soon as a single object appears in slab. For "kmalloc-8" we now
have 8 bytes for the useful data and 8 bytes for the obj_cgroup pointer.
Vlastimil
> Cheers,
> Longman
>
Powered by blists - more mailing lists