From: Wanpeng Li <liwp.linux@gmail.com>
To: Michal Hocko <mhocko@suse.cz>
Cc: linux-mm@kvack.org, Johannes Weiner <hannes@cmpxchg.org>,
KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki <kamezawa.hiroyu@jp.fujitsu.com>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
cgroups@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
Wanpeng Li <liwp.linux@gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH RFC] mm/memcg: recalculate chargeable space after waiting migrating charges
Date: Thu, 12 Jul 2012 21:38:22 +0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20120712133822.GA2432@kernel> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20120712122912.GH21013@tiehlicka.suse.cz>
On Thu, Jul 12, 2012 at 02:29:38PM +0200, Michal Hocko wrote:
>On Thu 12-07-12 19:51:25, Wanpeng Li wrote:
>> On Thu, Jul 12, 2012 at 01:08:38PM +0200, Michal Hocko wrote:
>> >On Thu 12-07-12 18:39:21, Wanpeng Li wrote:
>> >> From: Wanpeng Li <liwp@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
>> >>
>> >> Function mem_cgroup_do_charge will call mem_cgroup_reclaim,
>> >> there are two break points in mem_cgroup_reclaim:
>> >> if (total && (flag & MEM_CGROUP_RECLAIM_SHIRINK))
>> >> break;
>> >> if (mem_cgroup_margin(memcg))
>> >> break;
>> >> so mem_cgroup_reclaim can't guarantee reclaim enough pages(nr_pages)
>> >> which is requested from mem_cgroup_do_charge, if mem_cgroup_margin
>> >> (mem_over_limit) >= nr_pages is not true, the process will go to
>> >> mem_cgroup_wait_acct_move to wait doubly charge counted caused by
>> >> task move.
>> >
>> >I am sorry but I have no idea what you are trying to say. The
>> >mem_cgroup_wait_acct_move just makes sure that we are waiting until
>> >charge is moved (which can potentially free some charges) rather than
>> >OOM which should be the last resort so it makes sense to retry them
>> >charge.
>> >
>> >> But this time still can't guarantee enough pages(nr_pages) is
>> >> ready, directly return CHARGE_RETRY is incorret.
>> >
>> >So you think it is better to oom? Why? What prevents you from a race
>> >that your mem_cgroup_margin returns true but another CPU consumes those
>> >charges right after that. See? The check is pointless. It doesn't
>>
>> Hmm, if there are a race as you mentioned it can't guarantee enough pages
>> is ready.
>
>And there is no point in guaranteeing anything which I tried to tell you
>by the example... The only thing that matters is whether we get the charge
>on the next attempt and if not whether we are able to reclaim something.
>See?
>
>> But it also means that available memory is too low if this
>> race happen. If available charges still less than nr_pages
>> after mem_cgroup_wait_acct_move(which can potentially
>> free some charges) return, the CHAGE_RETRY will trigged,
>> and then mem_cgroup_do_charge=>meory_cgroup_reclaim
>> =>mem_cgroup_wait_acct_move, if available charges still less than
>> nr_pages in this round, CHAGE_RETRY.....
>
>> To avoid this infinite retry when available memory
>
>I do not see a realistic scenario which would cause this to be infinite loop
>withou OOM jumping in.
>We would have to hit the wait for move after each reclaim and the move would
>have to keep the the usage constant (move is really fast without moving
>charges).
>So what you are trying to address (if I understand it at all) is to fix
>an almost impossible to trigger issue with a bogus change which doesn't
>help at all because it is racy as well.
OK. Thank you Michal! :-)
Thanks & Best Regards,
Wanpeng Li
>
>> in this memcg is very low, go to OOM if mem_cgroup_margin(mem_over_limit)
>> < nr_pages is a better way I think. Because the codes have already try
>> its best to reclaim some pages. :-)
>
>
>>
>[...]
>--
>Michal Hocko
>SUSE Labs
>SUSE LINUX s.r.o.
>Lihovarska 1060/12
>190 00 Praha 9
>Czech Republic
--
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/ .
Don't email: <a href=mailto:"dont@kvack.org"> email@kvack.org </a>
prev parent reply other threads:[~2012-07-12 13:38 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 5+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2012-07-12 10:39 [PATCH RFC] mm/memcg: recalculate chargeable space after waiting migrating charges Wanpeng Li
2012-07-12 11:08 ` Michal Hocko
2012-07-12 11:51 ` Wanpeng Li
2012-07-12 12:29 ` Michal Hocko
2012-07-12 13:38 ` Wanpeng Li [this message]
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=20120712133822.GA2432@kernel \
--to=liwp.linux@gmail.com \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=cgroups@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=hannes@cmpxchg.org \
--cc=kamezawa.hiroyu@jp.fujitsu.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
--cc=mhocko@suse.cz \
/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 a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).