From: Johannes Weiner <hannes@cmpxchg.org>
To: Michal Hocko <mhocko@kernel.org>
Cc: Vladimir Davydov <vdavydov@virtuozzo.com>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
stable@vger.kernel.org, linux-mm@kvack.org,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 1/3] mm: memcontrol: fix swap counter leak on swapout from offline cgroup
Date: Tue, 2 Aug 2016 13:33:37 -0400 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20160802173337.GD6637@cmpxchg.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20160802160025.GB28900@dhcp22.suse.cz>
On Tue, Aug 02, 2016 at 06:00:26PM +0200, Michal Hocko wrote:
> On Tue 02-08-16 18:00:48, Vladimir Davydov wrote:
> > @@ -5767,15 +5785,20 @@ void mem_cgroup_swapout(struct page *page, swp_entry_t entry)
> > if (!memcg)
> > return;
> >
> > - mem_cgroup_id_get(memcg);
> > - oldid = swap_cgroup_record(entry, mem_cgroup_id(memcg));
> > + swap_memcg = mem_cgroup_id_get_active(memcg);
> > + oldid = swap_cgroup_record(entry, mem_cgroup_id(swap_memcg));
> > VM_BUG_ON_PAGE(oldid, page);
> > - mem_cgroup_swap_statistics(memcg, true);
> > + mem_cgroup_swap_statistics(swap_memcg, true);
> >
> > page->mem_cgroup = NULL;
> >
> > if (!mem_cgroup_is_root(memcg))
> > page_counter_uncharge(&memcg->memory, 1);
> > + if (memcg != swap_memcg) {
> > + if (!mem_cgroup_is_root(swap_memcg))
> > + page_counter_charge(&swap_memcg->memsw, 1);
> > + page_counter_uncharge(&memcg->memsw, 1);
> > + }
> >
> > /*
> > * Interrupts should be disabled here because the caller holds the
>
> The resulting code is a weird mixture of memcg and swap_memcg usage
> which is really confusing and error prone. Do we really have to do
> uncharge on an already offline memcg?
The charge is recursive and includes swap_memcg, i.e. live groups, so
the uncharge is necessary. I don't think the code is too bad, though?
swap_memcg is the target that is being charged for swap, memcg is the
origin group from which we swap out. Seems pretty straightforward...?
But maybe a comment above the memcg != swap_memcg check would be nice:
/*
* In case the memcg owning these pages has been offlined and doesn't
* have an ID allocated to it anymore, charge the closest online
* ancestor for the swap instead and transfer the memory+swap charge.
*/
Thinking about it, mem_cgroup_id_get_active() is a little strange; the
term we use throughout the cgroup code is "online". It might be good
to rename this mem_cgroup_id_get_online().
Thanks
--
To unsubscribe, send a message with 'unsubscribe linux-mm' in
the body to majordomo@kvack.org. For more info on Linux MM,
see: http://www.linux-mm.org/ .
Don't email: <a href=mailto:"dont@kvack.org"> email@kvack.org </a>
WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Johannes Weiner <hannes@cmpxchg.org>
To: Michal Hocko <mhocko@kernel.org>
Cc: Vladimir Davydov <vdavydov@virtuozzo.com>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
stable@vger.kernel.org, linux-mm@kvack.org,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 1/3] mm: memcontrol: fix swap counter leak on swapout from offline cgroup
Date: Tue, 2 Aug 2016 13:33:37 -0400 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20160802173337.GD6637@cmpxchg.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20160802160025.GB28900@dhcp22.suse.cz>
On Tue, Aug 02, 2016 at 06:00:26PM +0200, Michal Hocko wrote:
> On Tue 02-08-16 18:00:48, Vladimir Davydov wrote:
> > @@ -5767,15 +5785,20 @@ void mem_cgroup_swapout(struct page *page, swp_entry_t entry)
> > if (!memcg)
> > return;
> >
> > - mem_cgroup_id_get(memcg);
> > - oldid = swap_cgroup_record(entry, mem_cgroup_id(memcg));
> > + swap_memcg = mem_cgroup_id_get_active(memcg);
> > + oldid = swap_cgroup_record(entry, mem_cgroup_id(swap_memcg));
> > VM_BUG_ON_PAGE(oldid, page);
> > - mem_cgroup_swap_statistics(memcg, true);
> > + mem_cgroup_swap_statistics(swap_memcg, true);
> >
> > page->mem_cgroup = NULL;
> >
> > if (!mem_cgroup_is_root(memcg))
> > page_counter_uncharge(&memcg->memory, 1);
> > + if (memcg != swap_memcg) {
> > + if (!mem_cgroup_is_root(swap_memcg))
> > + page_counter_charge(&swap_memcg->memsw, 1);
> > + page_counter_uncharge(&memcg->memsw, 1);
> > + }
> >
> > /*
> > * Interrupts should be disabled here because the caller holds the
>
> The resulting code is a weird mixture of memcg and swap_memcg usage
> which is really confusing and error prone. Do we really have to do
> uncharge on an already offline memcg?
The charge is recursive and includes swap_memcg, i.e. live groups, so
the uncharge is necessary. I don't think the code is too bad, though?
swap_memcg is the target that is being charged for swap, memcg is the
origin group from which we swap out. Seems pretty straightforward...?
But maybe a comment above the memcg != swap_memcg check would be nice:
/*
* In case the memcg owning these pages has been offlined and doesn't
* have an ID allocated to it anymore, charge the closest online
* ancestor for the swap instead and transfer the memory+swap charge.
*/
Thinking about it, mem_cgroup_id_get_active() is a little strange; the
term we use throughout the cgroup code is "online". It might be good
to rename this mem_cgroup_id_get_online().
Thanks
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2016-08-02 17:36 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 40+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2016-08-02 15:00 [PATCH v2 1/3] mm: memcontrol: fix swap counter leak on swapout from offline cgroup Vladimir Davydov
2016-08-02 15:00 ` Vladimir Davydov
2016-08-02 15:00 ` Vladimir Davydov
2016-08-02 15:00 ` [PATCH v2 2/3] mm: memcontrol: fix memcg id ref counter on swap charge move Vladimir Davydov
2016-08-02 15:00 ` Vladimir Davydov
2016-08-02 15:00 ` Vladimir Davydov
2016-08-02 17:22 ` Johannes Weiner
2016-08-02 17:22 ` Johannes Weiner
2016-08-02 15:00 ` [PATCH v2 3/3] mm: memcontrol: add sanity checks for memcg->id.ref on get/put Vladimir Davydov
2016-08-02 15:00 ` Vladimir Davydov
2016-08-02 16:01 ` Michal Hocko
2016-08-02 16:01 ` Michal Hocko
2016-08-02 17:27 ` Johannes Weiner
2016-08-02 17:27 ` Johannes Weiner
2016-08-02 16:00 ` [PATCH v2 1/3] mm: memcontrol: fix swap counter leak on swapout from offline cgroup Michal Hocko
2016-08-02 16:00 ` Michal Hocko
2016-08-02 17:33 ` Johannes Weiner [this message]
2016-08-02 17:33 ` Johannes Weiner
2016-08-02 20:31 ` Michal Hocko
2016-08-02 20:31 ` Michal Hocko
2016-08-03 10:06 ` Vladimir Davydov
2016-08-03 10:06 ` Vladimir Davydov
2016-08-03 10:06 ` Vladimir Davydov
2016-08-03 9:50 ` Vladimir Davydov
2016-08-03 9:50 ` Vladimir Davydov
2016-08-03 9:50 ` Vladimir Davydov
2016-08-03 11:09 ` Michal Hocko
2016-08-03 11:09 ` Michal Hocko
2016-08-03 11:46 ` Vladimir Davydov
2016-08-03 11:46 ` Vladimir Davydov
2016-08-03 11:46 ` Vladimir Davydov
2016-08-03 12:00 ` Michal Hocko
2016-08-03 12:00 ` Michal Hocko
2016-08-03 14:12 ` Johannes Weiner
2016-08-03 14:12 ` Johannes Weiner
2016-08-03 14:31 ` Vladimir Davydov
2016-08-03 14:31 ` Vladimir Davydov
2016-08-03 14:31 ` Vladimir Davydov
2016-08-02 17:21 ` Johannes Weiner
2016-08-02 17:21 ` Johannes Weiner
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20160802173337.GD6637@cmpxchg.org \
--to=hannes@cmpxchg.org \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
--cc=mhocko@kernel.org \
--cc=stable@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=vdavydov@virtuozzo.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.