All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Michal Hocko <mhocko@kernel.org>
To: Yafang Shao <laoar.shao@gmail.com>
Cc: shakeelb@google.com, chris@chrisdown.name, hannes@cmpxchg.org,
	vdavydov.dev@gmail.com, akpm@linux-foundation.org,
	linux-mm@kvack.org, stable@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] mm, memcg: fix inconsistent oom event behavior
Date: Tue, 14 Apr 2020 17:22:57 +0200	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20200414152257.GP4629@dhcp22.suse.cz> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20200414015952.3590-1-laoar.shao@gmail.com>

On Mon 13-04-20 21:59:52, Yafang Shao wrote:
> A recent commit 9852ae3fe529 ("mm, memcg: consider subtrees in
> memory.events") changes the behavior of memcg events, which will
> consider subtrees in memory.events. But oom_kill event is a special one
> as it is used in both cgroup1 and cgroup2. In cgroup1, it is displayed
> in memory.oom_control. The file memory.oom_control is in both root memcg
> and non root memcg, that is different with memory.event as it only in
> non-root memcg. That commit is okay for cgroup2, but it is not okay for
> cgroup1 as it will cause inconsistent behavior between root memcg and
> non-root memcg.
> 
> Here's an example on why this behavior is inconsistent in cgroup1.
>      root memcg
>      /
>   memcg foo
>    /
> memcg bar
> 
> Suppose there's an oom_kill in memcg bar, then the oon_kill will be
> 
>      root memcg : memory.oom_control(oom_kill)  0
>      /
>   memcg foo : memory.oom_control(oom_kill)  1
>    /
> memcg bar : memory.oom_control(oom_kill)  1
> 
> For the non-root memcg, its memory.oom_control(oom_kill) includes its
> descendants' oom_kill, but for root memcg, it doesn't include its
> descendants' oom_kill. That means, memory.oom_control(oom_kill) has
> different meanings in different memcgs. That is inconsistent. Then the user
> has to know whether the memcg is root or not.
> 
> If we can't fully support it in cgroup1, for example by adding
> memory.events.local into cgroup1 as well, then let's don't touch
> its original behavior. So let's recover the original behavior for cgroup1.

Wthe localevents was mostly cgroup v2 feature. I do not think there was
an intention to have side effects on the legacy hierarchy. I thought
this would be the case but it is not apparently. Would it make more
sense to have CGRP_ROOT_MEMORY_LOCAL_EVENTS for legacy hierarchy by
default rather than special casing it somewhere quite deep in the code?

> Fixes: 9852ae3fe529 ("mm, memcg: consider subtrees in memory.events")
> Cc: Chris Down <chris@chrisdown.name>
> Cc: Johannes Weiner <hannes@cmpxchg.org>
> Cc: stable@vger.kernel.org
> Reviewed-by: Shakeel Butt <shakeelb@google.com>
> Signed-off-by: Yafang Shao <laoar.shao@gmail.com>
> ---
>  include/linux/memcontrol.h | 3 ++-
>  1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
> 
> diff --git a/include/linux/memcontrol.h b/include/linux/memcontrol.h
> index 8c340e6b347f..a0ae080a67d1 100644
> --- a/include/linux/memcontrol.h
> +++ b/include/linux/memcontrol.h
> @@ -798,7 +798,8 @@ static inline void memcg_memory_event(struct mem_cgroup *memcg,
>  		atomic_long_inc(&memcg->memory_events[event]);
>  		cgroup_file_notify(&memcg->events_file);
>  
> -		if (cgrp_dfl_root.flags & CGRP_ROOT_MEMORY_LOCAL_EVENTS)
> +		if (cgrp_dfl_root.flags & CGRP_ROOT_MEMORY_LOCAL_EVENTS ||
> +		    !cgroup_subsys_on_dfl(memory_cgrp_subsys))
>  			break;
>  	} while ((memcg = parent_mem_cgroup(memcg)) &&
>  		 !mem_cgroup_is_root(memcg));
> -- 
> 2.18.2

-- 
Michal Hocko
SUSE Labs


  reply	other threads:[~2020-04-14 15:23 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 10+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2020-04-14  1:59 [PATCH v2] mm, memcg: fix inconsistent oom event behavior Yafang Shao
2020-04-14 15:22 ` Michal Hocko [this message]
2020-04-14 15:57   ` Yafang Shao
  -- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2020-04-22 11:06 Yafang Shao
2020-04-22 11:51 ` Michal Hocko
2020-04-22 12:54 ` Johannes Weiner
2020-04-22 12:58   ` Yafang Shao
2020-04-22 13:02     ` Chris Down
2020-04-22 13:15       ` Yafang Shao
2020-04-22 13:15   ` Michal Hocko

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=20200414152257.GP4629@dhcp22.suse.cz \
    --to=mhocko@kernel.org \
    --cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
    --cc=chris@chrisdown.name \
    --cc=hannes@cmpxchg.org \
    --cc=laoar.shao@gmail.com \
    --cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
    --cc=shakeelb@google.com \
    --cc=stable@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=vdavydov.dev@gmail.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.