From: Glauber Costa <glommer@parallels.com>
To: KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki <kamezawa.hiroyu@jp.fujitsu.com>
Cc: <netdev@vger.kernel.org>, David Miller <davem@davemloft.net>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>
Subject: Re: [BUGFIX][PATCH 2/3] memcg/tcp: remove static_branch_slow_dec() at changing limit
Date: Fri, 30 Mar 2012 08:18:40 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <4F755040.5070403@parallels.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <4F74F57C.4030001@jp.fujitsu.com>
On 03/30/2012 01:51 AM, KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki wrote:
> (2012/03/29 19:58), Glauber Costa wrote:
>
>> On 03/29/2012 09:07 AM, KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki wrote:
>>> tcp memcontrol uses static_branch to optimize limit=RESOURCE_MAX case.
>>> If all cgroup's limit=RESOUCE_MAX, resource usage is not accounted.
>>> But it's buggy now.
>>>
>>> For example, do following
>>> # while sleep 1;do
>>> echo 9223372036854775807> /cgroup/memory/A/memory.kmem.tcp.limit_in_bytes;
>>> echo 300M> /cgroup/memory/A/memory.kmem.tcp.limit_in_bytes;
>>> done
>>>
>>> and run network application under A. tcp's usage is sometimes accounted
>>> and sometimes not accounted because of frequent changes of static_branch.
>>> Then, finally, you can see broken tcp.usage_in_bytes.
>>> WARN_ON() is printed because res_counter->usage goes below 0.
>>> ==
>>> kernel: ------------[ cut here ]----------
>>> kernel: WARNING: at kernel/res_counter.c:96 res_counter_uncharge_locked+0x37/0x40()
>>> <snip>
>>> kernel: Pid: 17753, comm: bash Tainted: G W 3.3.0+ #99
>>> kernel: Call Trace:
>>> kernel:<IRQ> [<ffffffff8104cc9f>] warn_slowpath_common+0x7f/0xc0
>>> kernel: [<ffffffff810d7e88>] ? rb_reserve__next_event+0x68/0x470
>>> kernel: [<ffffffff8104ccfa>] warn_slowpath_null+0x1a/0x20
>>> kernel: [<ffffffff810b4e37>] res_counter_uncharge_locked+0x37/0x40
>>> ...
>>> ==
>>>
>>> This patch removes static_branch_slow_dec() at changing res_counter's
>>> limit to RESOUCE_MAX. By this, once accounting started, the accountting
>>> will continue until the tcp cgroup is destroyed.
>>>
>>> I think this will not be problem in real use.
>>>
>>
>> So...
>>
>> Are the warnings still there if you have your other patch in this series?
>
>
> I wrote patch 3/3 after 2/3 because I found all case cannot be fixed by this.
>
> So, comparing patch 3/3 this fixes is leaking.
> Considering following sequence
>
> enable accounting
> tcp allocate buffer
> disable accounting
> tcp free buffer
>
> The accounted usage nerver disappear. This is the probelem which cannot be
> covered by patch 3/3. Maybe it's better to change order of patches 3/3 -> 2/3
> and describe this explicitly.
>
>> Maybe what we should do is, flush the resource counters so they go back
>> to 0 besides decrementing the static branch. This way we get a more
>> consistent behavior.
>>
>
> set all memcg's usage to be 0 at enable/disable accounting ?
> But, there is a problem which static_branch() update is slow. So,
> IIUC, we can't catch all cases because of races.
>
>
>> Another thing to keep in mind, is that the static branch will only be
>> inactive if we turn off *all* controllers. You see this happening
>> because you are only testing with one.
>
> yes. So, the behavior change by this patch will not affect usual cases.
>
>> So even if we go to the route you're proposing, we could probably try
>> doing something on the
>> global level, instead of a per-memcg boolean flat.
>
> In global level, static_key's counter handles it.
>
I gave it a bit more thought through the night... and I guess your
solution is okay.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2012-03-30 6:18 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 25+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2012-03-29 7:01 [BUGFIX][PATCH 0/3] memcg: tcp memcontrol fixes KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki
2012-03-29 7:03 ` [PATCH 1/3] [BUGFIX] memcg/tcp : fix to see use_hierarchy in tcp memcontrol cgroup KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki
2012-03-29 9:14 ` Glauber Costa
2012-03-29 9:16 ` KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki
2012-03-29 7:07 ` [BUGFIX][PATCH 2/3] memcg/tcp: remove static_branch_slow_dec() at changing limit KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki
2012-03-29 10:58 ` Glauber Costa
2012-03-29 23:51 ` KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki
2012-03-30 6:18 ` Glauber Costa [this message]
2012-03-29 7:10 ` [BUGFIX][PATCH 3/3] memcg/tcp: ignore tcp usage before accounting started KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki
2012-03-29 9:21 ` Glauber Costa
2012-03-30 1:44 ` [PATCH] memcg/tcp: fix warning caused b res->usage go to negative KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki
2012-04-06 15:49 ` Glauber Costa
2012-04-10 2:37 ` KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki
2012-04-10 2:51 ` Glauber Costa
2012-04-10 3:01 ` Glauber Costa
2012-04-10 4:15 ` KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki
2012-04-11 2:22 ` Glauber Costa
2012-04-10 3:21 ` KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki
2012-04-13 17:33 ` Glauber Costa
2012-04-18 8:02 ` KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki
2012-04-18 16:32 ` Glauber Costa
2012-04-02 3:41 ` [BUGFIX][PATCH 3/3] memcg/tcp: ignore tcp usage before accounting started David Miller
2012-04-03 22:31 ` Glauber Costa
2012-04-09 0:58 ` KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki
2012-04-09 1:44 ` Glauber Costa
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=4F755040.5070403@parallels.com \
--to=glommer@parallels.com \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=davem@davemloft.net \
--cc=kamezawa.hiroyu@jp.fujitsu.com \
--cc=netdev@vger.kernel.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.