netdev - Re: [PATCH v1] cgroup/rstat: add cgroup_rstat_cpu

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: <55854a94-681e-4142-9160-98b22fa64d61@kernel.org>
Date: Mon, 6 May 2024 14:03:47 +0200
From: Jesper Dangaard Brouer <hawk@...nel.org>
To: Shakeel Butt <shakeel.butt@...ux.dev>
Cc: Waiman Long <longman@...hat.com>, tj@...nel.org, hannes@...xchg.org,
 lizefan.x@...edance.com, cgroups@...r.kernel.org, yosryahmed@...gle.com,
 netdev@...r.kernel.org, linux-mm@...ck.org, kernel-team@...udflare.com,
 Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo <acme@...nel.org>,
 Sebastian Andrzej Siewior <bigeasy@...utronix.de>,
 Daniel Dao <dqminh@...udflare.com>, Ivan Babrou <ivan@...udflare.com>,
 jr@...udflare.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH v1] cgroup/rstat: add cgroup_rstat_cpu_lock helpers and
 tracepoints



On 03/05/2024 21.18, Shakeel Butt wrote:
> On Fri, May 03, 2024 at 04:00:20PM +0200, Jesper Dangaard Brouer wrote:
>>
>>
> [...]
>>>
>>> I may have mistakenly thinking the lock hold time refers to just the
>>> cpu_lock. Your reported times here are about the cgroup_rstat_lock.
>>> Right? If so, the numbers make sense to me.
>>>
>>
>> True, my reported number here are about the cgroup_rstat_lock.
>> Glad to hear, we are more aligned then :-)
>>
>> Given I just got some prod machines online with this patch
>> cgroup_rstat_cpu_lock tracepoints, I can give you some early results,
>> about hold-time for the cgroup_rstat_cpu_lock.
> 
> Oh you have already shared the preliminary data.
> 
>>
>>  From this oneliner bpftrace commands:
>>
>>    sudo bpftrace -e '
>>           tracepoint:cgroup:cgroup_rstat_cpu_lock_contended {
>>             @start[tid]=nsecs; @cnt[probe]=count()}
>>           tracepoint:cgroup:cgroup_rstat_cpu_locked {
>>             $now=nsecs;
>>             if (args->contended) {
>>               @wait_per_cpu_ns=hist($now-@...rt[tid]); delete(@start[tid]);}
>>             @cnt[probe]=count(); @locked[tid]=$now}
>>           tracepoint:cgroup:cgroup_rstat_cpu_unlock {
>>             $now=nsecs;
>>             @locked_per_cpu_ns=hist($now-@...ked[tid]); delete(@locked[tid]);
>>             @cnt[probe]=count()}
>>           interval:s:1 {time("%H:%M:%S "); print(@wait_per_cpu_ns);
>>             print(@locked_per_cpu_ns); print(@cnt); clear(@cnt);}'
>>
>> Results from one 1 sec period:
>>
>> 13:39:55 @wait_per_cpu_ns:
>> [512, 1K)              3 |      |
>> [1K, 2K)              12 |@      |
>> [2K, 4K)             390
>> |@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@|
>> [4K, 8K)              70 |@@@@@@@@@      |
>> [8K, 16K)             24 |@@@      |
>> [16K, 32K)           183 |@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@      |
>> [32K, 64K)            11 |@      |
>>
>> @locked_per_cpu_ns:
>> [256, 512)         75592 |@      |
>> [512, 1K)        2537357
>> |@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@|
>> [1K, 2K)          528615 |@@@@@@@@@@      |
>> [2K, 4K)          168519 |@@@      |
>> [4K, 8K)          162039 |@@@      |
>> [8K, 16K)         100730 |@@      |
>> [16K, 32K)         42276 |      |
>> [32K, 64K)          1423 |      |
>> [64K, 128K)           89 |      |
>>
>>   @cnt[tracepoint:cgroup:cgroup_rstat_cpu_lock_contended]: 3 /sec
>>   @cnt[tracepoint:cgroup:cgroup_rstat_cpu_unlock]: 3200  /sec
>>   @cnt[tracepoint:cgroup:cgroup_rstat_cpu_locked]: 3200  /sec
>>
>>
>> So, we see "flush-code-path" per-CPU-holding @locked_per_cpu_ns isn't
>> exceeding 128 usec.
> 
> Hmm 128 usec is actually unexpectedly high. 

> How does the cgroup hierarchy on your system looks like? 
I didn't design this, so hopefully my co-workers can help me out here? 
(To @Daniel or @Jon)

My low level view is that, there are 17 top-level directories in 
/sys/fs/cgroup/.
There are 649 cgroups (counting occurrence of memory.stat).
There are two directories that contain the major part.
  - /sys/fs/cgroup/system.slice = 379
  - /sys/fs/cgroup/production.slice = 233
  - (production.slice have directory two levels)
  - remaining 37

We are open to changing this if you have any advice?
(@Daniel and @Jon are actually working on restructuring this)

> How many cgroups have actual workloads running?
Do you have a command line trick to determine this?


> Can the network softirqs run on any cpus or smaller
> set of cpus? I am assuming these softirqs are processing packets from
> any or all cgroups and thus have larger cgroup update tree. 

Softirq and specifically NET_RX is running half of the cores (e.g. 64).
(I'm looking at restructuring this allocation)

> I wonder if
> you comment out MEMCG_SOCK stat update and still see the same holding
> time.
>

It doesn't look like MEMCG_SOCK is used.

I deduct you are asking:
  - What is the update count for different types of mod_memcg_state() calls?

// Dumped via BTF info
enum memcg_stat_item {
         MEMCG_SWAP = 43,
         MEMCG_SOCK = 44,
         MEMCG_PERCPU_B = 45,
         MEMCG_VMALLOC = 46,
         MEMCG_KMEM = 47,
         MEMCG_ZSWAP_B = 48,
         MEMCG_ZSWAPPED = 49,
         MEMCG_NR_STAT = 50,
};

sudo bpftrace -e 'kfunc:vmlinux:__mod_memcg_state{@[args->idx]=count()} 
END{printf("\nEND time elapsed: %d sec\n", elapsed / 1000000000);}'
Attaching 2 probes...
^C
END time elapsed: 99 sec

@[45]: 17996
@[46]: 18603
@[43]: 61858
@[47]: 21398919

It seems clear that MEMCG_KMEM = 47 is the main "user".
  - 21398919/99 = 216150 calls per sec

Could someone explain to me what this MEMCG_KMEM is used for?


>>
>> My latency requirements, to avoid RX-queue overflow, with 1024 slots,
>> running at 25 Gbit/s, is 27.6 usec with small packets, and 500 usec
>> (0.5ms) with MTU size packets.  This is very close to my latency
>> requirements.
>>
>> --Jesper
>>