linux-kernel - Re: [RFC PATCH net-next 3/3] sock: Throttle pressure-aware sockets under pressure

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 for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <20230901135932.GH140739@kernel.org>
Date:   Fri, 1 Sep 2023 15:59:32 +0200
From:   Simon Horman <horms@...nel.org>
To:     Abel Wu <wuyun.abel@...edance.com>
Cc:     "David S. Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>,
        Eric Dumazet <edumazet@...gle.com>,
        Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org>,
        Paolo Abeni <pabeni@...hat.com>,
        Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
        Shakeel Butt <shakeelb@...gle.com>,
        Roman Gushchin <roman.gushchin@...ux.dev>,
        Michal Hocko <mhocko@...e.com>,
        Johannes Weiner <hannes@...xchg.org>,
        Yosry Ahmed <yosryahmed@...gle.com>,
        Yu Zhao <yuzhao@...gle.com>,
        "Matthew Wilcox (Oracle)" <willy@...radead.org>,
        Kefeng Wang <wangkefeng.wang@...wei.com>,
        Yafang Shao <laoar.shao@...il.com>,
        Kuniyuki Iwashima <kuniyu@...zon.com>,
        Martin KaFai Lau <martin.lau@...nel.org>,
        Breno Leitao <leitao@...ian.org>,
        Alexander Mikhalitsyn <alexander@...alicyn.com>,
        David Howells <dhowells@...hat.com>,
        Jason Xing <kernelxing@...cent.com>,
        open list <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        "open list:NETWORKING [GENERAL]" <netdev@...r.kernel.org>,
        "open list:MEMORY MANAGEMENT" <linux-mm@...ck.org>
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH net-next 3/3] sock: Throttle pressure-aware sockets
 under pressure

On Fri, Sep 01, 2023 at 02:21:28PM +0800, Abel Wu wrote:
> A socket is pressure-aware when its protocol has pressure defined, that
> is sk_has_memory_pressure(sk) != NULL, e.g. TCP. These protocols might
> want to limit the usage of socket memory depending on both the state of
> global & memcg pressure through sk_under_memory_pressure(sk).
> 
> While for allocation, memcg pressure will be simply ignored when usage
> is under global limit (sysctl_mem[0]). This behavior has different impacts
> on different cgroup modes. In cgroupv2 socket and other purposes share a
> same memory limit, thus allowing sockmem to burst under memcg reclaiming
> pressure could lead to longer stall, sometimes even OOM. While cgroupv1
> has no such worries.
> 
> As a cloud service provider, we encountered a problem in our production
> environment during the transition from cgroup v1 to v2 (partly due to the
> heavy taxes of accounting socket memory in v1). Say one workload behaves
> fine in cgroupv1 with memcg limit configured to 10GB memory and another
> 1GB tcpmem, but will suck (or even be OOM-killed) in v2 with 11GB memory
> due to burst memory usage on socket, since there is no specific limit for
> socket memory in cgroupv2 and relies largely on workloads doing traffic
> control themselves.
> 
> It's rational for the workloads to build some traffic control to better
> utilize the resources they bought, but from kernel's point of view it's
> also reasonable to suppress the allocation of socket memory once there is
> a shortage of free memory, given that performance degradation is better
> than failure.
> 
> As per the above, this patch aims to be more conservative on allocation
> for the pressure-aware sockets under global and/or memcg pressure. While
> OTOH throttling on incoming traffic could hurt latency badly possibly
> due to SACKed segs get dropped from the OFO queue. See a related commit
> 720ca52bcef22 ("net-memcg: avoid stalls when under memory pressure").
> This patch preserves this decision by throttling RX allocation only at
> critical pressure level when it hardly makes sense to continue receive
> data.
> 
> No functional change intended for pressure-unaware protocols.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Abel Wu <wuyun.abel@...edance.com>

...

> @@ -3087,8 +3100,20 @@ int __sk_mem_raise_allocated(struct sock *sk, int size, int amt, int kind)
>  	if (sk_has_memory_pressure(sk)) {
>  		u64 alloc;
>  
> -		if (!sk_under_memory_pressure(sk))
> +		/* Be more conservative if the socket's memcg (or its
> +		 * parents) is under reclaim pressure, try to possibly
> +		 * avoid further memstall.
> +		 */
> +		if (under_memcg_pressure)
> +			goto suppress_allocation;
> +
> +		if (!sk_under_global_memory_pressure(sk))
>  			return 1;
> +
> +		/* Trying to be fair among all the sockets of same
> +		 * protocal under global memory pressure, by allowing

nit: checkpatch.pl --codespell says, protocal -> protocol

> +		 * the ones that under average usage to raise.
> +		 */
>  		alloc = sk_sockets_allocated_read_positive(sk);
>  		if (sk_prot_mem_limits(sk, 2) > alloc *
>  		    sk_mem_pages(sk->sk_wmem_queued +
> -- 
> 2.37.3
> 
>