From: Peng Haitao <penght-BthXqXjhjHXQFUHtdCDX3A@public.gmane.org>
To: Michal Hocko <mhocko-AlSwsSmVLrQ@public.gmane.org>
Cc: cgroups-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org,
kamezawa.hiroyu-+CUm20s59erQFUHtdCDX3A@public.gmane.org,
Johannes Weiner <hannes-druUgvl0LCNAfugRpC6u6w@public.gmane.org>,
linux-mm-Bw31MaZKKs3YtjvyW6yDsg@public.gmane.org,
LKML <linux-kernel-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org>
Subject: Re: how to make memory.memsw.failcnt is nonzero
Date: Fri, 06 Jan 2012 17:47:10 +0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <4F06C31E.4010904@cn.fujitsu.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20120103160411.GD3891-VqjxzfR4DlwKmadIfiO5sKVXKuFTiq87@public.gmane.org>
Michal Hocko said the following on 2012-1-4 0:04:
>> # echo 15M > memory.memsw.limit_in_bytes
>> # dd if=/dev/zero of=/tmp/temp_file count=20 bs=1M
>> Killed
>> # grep "failcnt" /var/log/messages | tail -2
>> Dec 28 17:08:45 K-test kernel: memory: usage 10240kB, limit 10240kB, failcnt 86
>> Dec 28 17:08:45 K-test kernel: memory+swap: usage 10240kB, limit 15360kB, failcnt 0
>> # cat memory.memsw.failcnt
>> 0
>>
>> The limit is 15M, but memory+swap usage also is 10M.
>> I think memory+swap usage should be 15M and memsw.failcnt should be nonzero.
>>
> So there is almost 10M of page cache that we can simply reclaim. If we
> use 40M limit then we are OK. So this looks like the small limit somehow
> tricks our math in the reclaim path and we think there is nothing to
> reclaim.
> I will look into this.
Thanks for you reply.
If there is something wrong, I think the bug will be in mem_cgroup_do_charge()
of mm/memcontrol.c
2210 ret = res_counter_charge(&memcg->res, csize, &fail_res);
2211
2212 if (likely(!ret)) {
2213 if (!do_swap_account)
2214 return CHARGE_OK;
2215 ret = res_counter_charge(&memcg->memsw, csize, &fail_res);
2216 if (likely(!ret))
2217 return CHARGE_OK;
2218
2219 res_counter_uncharge(&memcg->res, csize);
2220 mem_over_limit = mem_cgroup_from_res_counter(fail_res, memsw);
2221 flags |= MEM_CGROUP_RECLAIM_NOSWAP;
2222 } else
2223 mem_over_limit = mem_cgroup_from_res_counter(fail_res, res);
When hit memory.limit_in_bytes, res_counter_charge() will return -ENOMEM,
this will execute line 2222: } else.
But I think when hit memory.limit_in_bytes, the function should determine further
to memory.memsw.limit_in_bytes.
This think is OK?
--
Best Regards,
Peng
WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Peng Haitao <penght@cn.fujitsu.com>
To: Michal Hocko <mhocko@suse.cz>
Cc: cgroups@vger.kernel.org, kamezawa.hiroyu@jp.fujitsu.com,
Johannes Weiner <hannes@cmpxchg.org>,
linux-mm@kvack.org, LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: how to make memory.memsw.failcnt is nonzero
Date: Fri, 06 Jan 2012 17:47:10 +0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <4F06C31E.4010904@cn.fujitsu.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20120103160411.GD3891@tiehlicka.suse.cz>
Michal Hocko said the following on 2012-1-4 0:04:
>> # echo 15M > memory.memsw.limit_in_bytes
>> # dd if=/dev/zero of=/tmp/temp_file count=20 bs=1M
>> Killed
>> # grep "failcnt" /var/log/messages | tail -2
>> Dec 28 17:08:45 K-test kernel: memory: usage 10240kB, limit 10240kB, failcnt 86
>> Dec 28 17:08:45 K-test kernel: memory+swap: usage 10240kB, limit 15360kB, failcnt 0
>> # cat memory.memsw.failcnt
>> 0
>>
>> The limit is 15M, but memory+swap usage also is 10M.
>> I think memory+swap usage should be 15M and memsw.failcnt should be nonzero.
>>
> So there is almost 10M of page cache that we can simply reclaim. If we
> use 40M limit then we are OK. So this looks like the small limit somehow
> tricks our math in the reclaim path and we think there is nothing to
> reclaim.
> I will look into this.
Thanks for you reply.
If there is something wrong, I think the bug will be in mem_cgroup_do_charge()
of mm/memcontrol.c
2210 ret = res_counter_charge(&memcg->res, csize, &fail_res);
2211
2212 if (likely(!ret)) {
2213 if (!do_swap_account)
2214 return CHARGE_OK;
2215 ret = res_counter_charge(&memcg->memsw, csize, &fail_res);
2216 if (likely(!ret))
2217 return CHARGE_OK;
2218
2219 res_counter_uncharge(&memcg->res, csize);
2220 mem_over_limit = mem_cgroup_from_res_counter(fail_res, memsw);
2221 flags |= MEM_CGROUP_RECLAIM_NOSWAP;
2222 } else
2223 mem_over_limit = mem_cgroup_from_res_counter(fail_res, res);
When hit memory.limit_in_bytes, res_counter_charge() will return -ENOMEM,
this will execute line 2222: } else.
But I think when hit memory.limit_in_bytes, the function should determine further
to memory.memsw.limit_in_bytes.
This think is OK?
--
Best Regards,
Peng
--
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/ .
Fight unfair telecom internet charges in Canada: sign http://stopthemeter.ca/
Don't email: <a href=mailto:"dont@kvack.org"> email@kvack.org </a>
WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Peng Haitao <penght@cn.fujitsu.com>
To: Michal Hocko <mhocko@suse.cz>
Cc: cgroups@vger.kernel.org, kamezawa.hiroyu@jp.fujitsu.com,
Johannes Weiner <hannes@cmpxchg.org>,
linux-mm@kvack.org, LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: how to make memory.memsw.failcnt is nonzero
Date: Fri, 06 Jan 2012 17:47:10 +0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <4F06C31E.4010904@cn.fujitsu.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20120103160411.GD3891@tiehlicka.suse.cz>
Michal Hocko said the following on 2012-1-4 0:04:
>> # echo 15M > memory.memsw.limit_in_bytes
>> # dd if=/dev/zero of=/tmp/temp_file count=20 bs=1M
>> Killed
>> # grep "failcnt" /var/log/messages | tail -2
>> Dec 28 17:08:45 K-test kernel: memory: usage 10240kB, limit 10240kB, failcnt 86
>> Dec 28 17:08:45 K-test kernel: memory+swap: usage 10240kB, limit 15360kB, failcnt 0
>> # cat memory.memsw.failcnt
>> 0
>>
>> The limit is 15M, but memory+swap usage also is 10M.
>> I think memory+swap usage should be 15M and memsw.failcnt should be nonzero.
>>
> So there is almost 10M of page cache that we can simply reclaim. If we
> use 40M limit then we are OK. So this looks like the small limit somehow
> tricks our math in the reclaim path and we think there is nothing to
> reclaim.
> I will look into this.
Thanks for you reply.
If there is something wrong, I think the bug will be in mem_cgroup_do_charge()
of mm/memcontrol.c
2210 ret = res_counter_charge(&memcg->res, csize, &fail_res);
2211
2212 if (likely(!ret)) {
2213 if (!do_swap_account)
2214 return CHARGE_OK;
2215 ret = res_counter_charge(&memcg->memsw, csize, &fail_res);
2216 if (likely(!ret))
2217 return CHARGE_OK;
2218
2219 res_counter_uncharge(&memcg->res, csize);
2220 mem_over_limit = mem_cgroup_from_res_counter(fail_res, memsw);
2221 flags |= MEM_CGROUP_RECLAIM_NOSWAP;
2222 } else
2223 mem_over_limit = mem_cgroup_from_res_counter(fail_res, res);
When hit memory.limit_in_bytes, res_counter_charge() will return -ENOMEM,
this will execute line 2222: } else.
But I think when hit memory.limit_in_bytes, the function should determine further
to memory.memsw.limit_in_bytes.
This think is OK?
--
Best Regards,
Peng
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2012-01-06 9:47 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 20+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2011-12-28 9:23 how to make memory.memsw.failcnt is nonzero Peng Haitao
[not found] ` <4EFADFF8.5020703-BthXqXjhjHXQFUHtdCDX3A@public.gmane.org>
2012-01-03 16:04 ` Michal Hocko
2012-01-03 16:04 ` Michal Hocko
2012-01-03 16:04 ` Michal Hocko
[not found] ` <20120103160411.GD3891-VqjxzfR4DlwKmadIfiO5sKVXKuFTiq87@public.gmane.org>
2012-01-06 9:47 ` Peng Haitao [this message]
2012-01-06 9:47 ` Peng Haitao
2012-01-06 9:47 ` Peng Haitao
2012-01-06 10:12 ` Michal Hocko
2012-01-06 10:12 ` Michal Hocko
[not found] ` <20120106101219.GB10292-VqjxzfR4DlwKmadIfiO5sKVXKuFTiq87@public.gmane.org>
2012-01-30 2:47 ` Peng Haitao
2012-01-30 2:47 ` Peng Haitao
2012-01-30 2:47 ` Peng Haitao
[not found] ` <4F2604C5.7050900-BthXqXjhjHXQFUHtdCDX3A@public.gmane.org>
2012-01-30 7:24 ` KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki
2012-01-30 7:24 ` KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki
2012-01-30 7:24 ` KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki
2012-01-30 2:34 ` Peng Haitao
2012-01-30 2:34 ` Peng Haitao
2012-01-30 2:34 ` Peng Haitao
2012-01-30 8:46 ` Michal Hocko
2012-01-30 8:46 ` 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=4F06C31E.4010904@cn.fujitsu.com \
--to=penght-bthxqxjhjhxqfuhtdcdx3a@public.gmane.org \
--cc=cgroups-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org \
--cc=hannes-druUgvl0LCNAfugRpC6u6w@public.gmane.org \
--cc=kamezawa.hiroyu-+CUm20s59erQFUHtdCDX3A@public.gmane.org \
--cc=linux-kernel-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org \
--cc=linux-mm-Bw31MaZKKs3YtjvyW6yDsg@public.gmane.org \
--cc=mhocko-AlSwsSmVLrQ@public.gmane.org \
/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.