linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v3 2/2] mm: memcg: introduce new event to trace shrink

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: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

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

Date:   Mon, 27 Nov 2023 10:33:49 +0100
From:   Michal Hocko <mhocko@...e.com>
To:     Dmitry Rokosov <ddrokosov@...utedevices.com>
Cc:     rostedt@...dmis.org, mhiramat@...nel.org, hannes@...xchg.org,
        roman.gushchin@...ux.dev, shakeelb@...gle.com,
        muchun.song@...ux.dev, akpm@...ux-foundation.org,
        kernel@...rdevices.ru, rockosov@...il.com, cgroups@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-mm@...ck.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
        bpf@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 2/2] mm: memcg: introduce new event to trace
 shrink_memcg

On Thu 23-11-23 22:39:37, Dmitry Rokosov wrote:
> The shrink_memcg flow plays a crucial role in memcg reclamation.
> Currently, it is not possible to trace this point from non-direct
> reclaim paths. However, direct reclaim has its own tracepoint, so there
> is no issue there. In certain cases, when debugging memcg pressure,
> developers may need to identify all potential requests for memcg
> reclamation including kswapd(). The patchset introduces the tracepoints
> mm_vmscan_memcg_shrink_{begin|end}() to address this problem.
> 
> Example of output in the kswapd context (non-direct reclaim):
>     kswapd0-39      [001] .....   240.356378: mm_vmscan_memcg_shrink_begin: order=0 gfp_flags=GFP_KERNEL memcg=16
>     kswapd0-39      [001] .....   240.356396: mm_vmscan_memcg_shrink_end: nr_reclaimed=0 memcg=16
>     kswapd0-39      [001] .....   240.356420: mm_vmscan_memcg_shrink_begin: order=0 gfp_flags=GFP_KERNEL memcg=16
>     kswapd0-39      [001] .....   240.356454: mm_vmscan_memcg_shrink_end: nr_reclaimed=1 memcg=16
>     kswapd0-39      [001] .....   240.356479: mm_vmscan_memcg_shrink_begin: order=0 gfp_flags=GFP_KERNEL memcg=16
>     kswapd0-39      [001] .....   240.356506: mm_vmscan_memcg_shrink_end: nr_reclaimed=4 memcg=16
>     kswapd0-39      [001] .....   240.356525: mm_vmscan_memcg_shrink_begin: order=0 gfp_flags=GFP_KERNEL memcg=16
>     kswapd0-39      [001] .....   240.356593: mm_vmscan_memcg_shrink_end: nr_reclaimed=11 memcg=16
>     kswapd0-39      [001] .....   240.356614: mm_vmscan_memcg_shrink_begin: order=0 gfp_flags=GFP_KERNEL memcg=16
>     kswapd0-39      [001] .....   240.356738: mm_vmscan_memcg_shrink_end: nr_reclaimed=25 memcg=16
>     kswapd0-39      [001] .....   240.356790: mm_vmscan_memcg_shrink_begin: order=0 gfp_flags=GFP_KERNEL memcg=16
>     kswapd0-39      [001] .....   240.357125: mm_vmscan_memcg_shrink_end: nr_reclaimed=53 memcg=16

In the previous version I have asked why do we need this specific
tracepoint when we already do have trace_mm_vmscan_lru_shrink_{in}active
which already give you a very good insight. That includes the number of
reclaimed pages but also more. I do see that we do not include memcg id
of the reclaimed LRU, but that shouldn't be a big problem to add, no?

-- 
Michal Hocko
SUSE Labs