Re: [PATCH 5/5] Account certain kmem allocations to memcg

[Michal Hocko <mhocko-DgEjT+Ai2ygdnm+yROfE0A@public.gmane.org>]

On Tue 10-11-15 11:07:09, Vladimir Davydov wrote:
> On Mon, Nov 09, 2015 at 03:39:55PM +0100, Michal Hocko wrote:
[...]
> > pipe buffers are trivial to abuse (e.g. via fd passing) so we want to
> 
> You might also mention allocations caused by select/poll, page tables,
> radix_tree_node, etc. They all might be abused, but the primary purpose
> of this patch set is not catching abusers, but providing reasonable
> level of isolation for most normal workloads. Let's add everything above
> that in separate patches.

Sure I do not have any objections against step by step approach.
 
> > cap those as well. The following should do the trick AFAICS.
> 
> Actually, no - you only account pipe metadata while anon pipe buffer
> pages, which usually constitute most of memory consumed by a pipe, still
> go unaccounted. I'm planning to make pipe accountable later.

You are right! I have missed pipe_write allocates the real page.

> > ---
> > diff --git a/fs/pipe.c b/fs/pipe.c
> > index 8865f7963700..c4b7e8c08362 100644
> > --- a/fs/pipe.c
> > +++ b/fs/pipe.c
> > @@ -590,7 +590,7 @@ struct pipe_inode_info *alloc_pipe_info(void)
> >  
> >  	pipe = kzalloc(sizeof(struct pipe_inode_info), GFP_KERNEL);
> >  	if (pipe) {
> > -		pipe->bufs = kzalloc(sizeof(struct pipe_buffer) * PIPE_DEF_BUFFERS, GFP_KERNEL);
> > +		pipe->bufs = kzalloc(sizeof(struct pipe_buffer) * PIPE_DEF_BUFFERS, GFP_KERNEL | __GFP_ACCOUNT);
> 
> GFP_KERNEL | __GFP_ACCOUNT are used really often, that's why I
> introduced GFP_KERNEL_ACCOUNT.

Sure that is better.
-- 
Michal Hocko
SUSE Labs