From: KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki <kamezawa.hiroyu@jp.fujitsu.com>
To: Ying Han <yinghan@google.com>
Cc: Johannes Weiner <hannes@cmpxchg.org>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
Michal Hocko <mhocko@suse.cz>, Mel Gorman <mel@csn.ul.ie>,
Rik van Riel <riel@redhat.com>, Hillf Danton <dhillf@gmail.com>,
Hugh Dickins <hughd@google.com>,
Dan Magenheimer <dan.magenheimer@oracle.com>,
linux-mm@kvack.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH V2] memcg: add mlock statistic in memory.stat
Date: Fri, 20 Apr 2012 15:16:55 +0900 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <4F90FF57.9060401@jp.fujitsu.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CALWz4iw5+ypsD_vwm6vcDKN-JrV_riF4mFvQME2zr2jR_iNuOg@mail.gmail.com>
(2012/04/20 14:57), Ying Han wrote:
> On Thu, Apr 19, 2012 at 5:37 PM, KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki
> <kamezawa.hiroyu@jp.fujitsu.com> wrote:
>> (2012/04/19 22:12), Johannes Weiner wrote:
>>> Plus this code runs for ALL uncharges, the unlikely() and preliminary
>>> flag testing don't make it okay. It's bad that we have this in the
>>> allocator, but at least it would be good to hook into that branch and
>>> not add another one.
>>>
>>> pc->mem_cgroup stays intact after the uncharge. Could we make the
>>> memcg removal path wait on the mlock counter to drop to zero instead
>>> and otherwise keep Ying's version?
>>>
>>
>>
>> handling problem in ->destroy() path ? Hmm, it will work against use-after-free.
>
>> But accounting problem which may be caused by mem_cgroup_lru_add_list() cannot
>> be handled, which overwrites pc->mem_cgroup.
>
> Kame, can you clarify that? What the mem_cgroup_lru_add_list() has
> anything to do w/ this problem?
>
It overwrites pc->mem_cgroup. Then, Assume a task in cgroup "A".
1. page is charged. pc->mem_cgroup = A + Used bit.
2. page is set Mlocked. A's mlock-counter += 1
3. page is uncharged - Used bit.
4. page is added to lru pc->mem_cgroup = root
5. page is freed root's mlock-coutner -=1,
Then, A's mlock-counter +1, root's mlock-counter -1 IF free_pages()
really handle mlocked pages...
>>
>> But hm, is this too slow ?...
>> ==
>> mem_cgroup_uncharge_common()
>> {
>> ....
>> if (PageSwapCache(page) || PageMlocked(page))
>> return NULL;
>> }
>>
>> page_alloc.c::
>>
>> static inline void free_page_mlock(struct page *page)
>> {
>>
>> __dec_zone_page_state(page, NR_MLOCK);
>> __count_vm_event(UNEVICTABLE_MLOCKFREED);
>>
>> mem_cgroup_uncharge_page(page);
>> }
>> ==
>>
>> BTW, at reading code briefly....why we have hooks in free_page() ?
>>
>> It seems do_munmap() and exit_mmap() calls munlock_vma_pages_all().
>> So, it seems all vmas which has VM_MLOCKED are checked before freeing.
>> vmscan never frees mlocked pages, I think.
>>
>> Any other path to free mlocked pages without munlock ?
>
> I found this commit which introduced the hook in the freeing path,
> however I couldn't get more details why it was introduced from the
> commit description
>
> commit 985737cf2ea096ea946aed82c7484d40defc71a8
> Author: Lee Schermerhorn <lee.schermerhorn@hp.com>
> Date: Sat Oct 18 20:26:53 2008 -0700
>
> mlock: count attempts to free mlocked page
>
> Allow free of mlock()ed pages. This shouldn't happen, but during
> developement, it occasionally did.
>
> This patch allows us to survive that condition, while keeping the
> statistics and events correct for debug.
>
>> I feel freeing Mlocked page is a cause of problems.
>
Sigh...."This shouldn't happen"!!!!!
How about adding warning to free_page() path and remove your current hook ?
Thanks,
-Kame
--
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>
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2012-04-20 6:20 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 13+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2012-04-18 18:21 [PATCH V2] memcg: add mlock statistic in memory.stat Ying Han
2012-04-18 23:33 ` Andrew Morton
2012-04-19 0:59 ` KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki
2012-04-19 13:12 ` Johannes Weiner
2012-04-19 22:46 ` Ying Han
2012-04-19 23:04 ` Johannes Weiner
2012-04-20 0:37 ` KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki
2012-04-20 5:57 ` Ying Han
2012-04-20 6:16 ` KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki [this message]
2012-04-20 6:39 ` Ying Han
2012-04-20 6:52 ` KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki
2012-04-19 22:43 ` Ying Han
2012-04-19 22:30 ` Ying Han
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=4F90FF57.9060401@jp.fujitsu.com \
--to=kamezawa.hiroyu@jp.fujitsu.com \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=dan.magenheimer@oracle.com \
--cc=dhillf@gmail.com \
--cc=hannes@cmpxchg.org \
--cc=hughd@google.com \
--cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
--cc=mel@csn.ul.ie \
--cc=mhocko@suse.cz \
--cc=riel@redhat.com \
--cc=yinghan@google.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.