From: Tejun Heo <tj@kernel.org>
To: Hugh Dickins <hughd@google.com>
Cc: Filipe Brandenburger <filbranden@google.com>,
Li Zefan <lizefan@huawei.com>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
Michal Hocko <mhocko@suse.cz>,
Johannes Weiner <hannes@cmpxchg.org>,
Greg Thelen <gthelen@google.com>,
Michel Lespinasse <walken@google.com>,
Markus Blank-Burian <burian@muenster.de>,
Shawn Bohrer <shawn.bohrer@gmail.com>,
cgroups@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
linux-mm@kvack.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] cgroup: use an ordered workqueue for cgroup destruction
Date: Fri, 7 Feb 2014 09:04:02 -0500 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20140207140402.GA3304@htj.dyndns.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <alpine.LSU.2.11.1402061541560.31342@eggly.anvils>
Hello, Hugh.
On Thu, Feb 06, 2014 at 03:56:01PM -0800, Hugh Dickins wrote:
> Sometimes the cleanup after memcg hierarchy testing gets stuck in
> mem_cgroup_reparent_charges(), unable to bring non-kmem usage down to 0.
>
> There may turn out to be several causes, but a major cause is this: the
> workitem to offline parent can get run before workitem to offline child;
> parent's mem_cgroup_reparent_charges() circles around waiting for the
> child's pages to be reparented to its lrus, but it's holding cgroup_mutex
> which prevents the child from reaching its mem_cgroup_reparent_charges().
>
> Just use an ordered workqueue for cgroup_destroy_wq.
Hmmm... I'm not really comfortable with this. This would seal shut
any possiblity of increasing concurrency in that path, which is okay
now but I find the combination of such long term commitment and the
non-obviousness (it's not apparent from looking at memcg code why it
wouldn't deadlock) very unappealing. Besides, the only reason
offline() is currently called under cgroup_mutex is history. We can
move it out of cgroup_mutex right now.
But even with offline being called outside cgroup_mutex, IIRC, the
described problem would still be able to deadlock as long as the tree
depth is deeper than max concurrency level of the destruction
workqueue. Sure, we can give it large enough number but it's
generally nasty.
One thing I don't get is why memcg has such reverse dependency at all.
Why does the parent wait for its descendants to do something during
offline? Shouldn't it be able to just bail and let whatever
descendant which is stil busy propagate things upwards? That's a
usual pattern we use to tree shutdowns anyway. Would that be nasty to
implement in memcg?
Thanks.
--
tejun
--
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>
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2014-02-07 14:04 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 17+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2014-02-06 23:56 [PATCH] cgroup: use an ordered workqueue for cgroup destruction Hugh Dickins
2014-02-07 13:45 ` Michal Hocko
2014-02-07 14:04 ` Tejun Heo [this message]
2014-02-07 14:37 ` Michal Hocko
2014-02-07 15:13 ` Tejun Heo
2014-02-07 15:28 ` Michal Hocko
2014-02-07 20:20 ` Hugh Dickins
2014-02-07 20:35 ` Tejun Heo
2014-02-07 21:06 ` Hugh Dickins
2014-02-07 15:21 ` Tejun Heo
2014-02-07 16:43 ` Johannes Weiner
2014-02-10 15:46 ` Michal Hocko
2014-02-12 22:59 ` Hugh Dickins
2014-02-12 23:06 ` [PATCH 2/2] cgroup: bring back kill_cnt to order css destruction Hugh Dickins
2014-02-13 0:28 ` Tejun Heo
2014-02-13 0:38 ` Hugh Dickins
2014-02-13 0:09 ` [PATCH] Revert "cgroup: use an ordered workqueue for cgroup destruction" Tejun Heo
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=20140207140402.GA3304@htj.dyndns.org \
--to=tj@kernel.org \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=burian@muenster.de \
--cc=cgroups@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=filbranden@google.com \
--cc=gthelen@google.com \
--cc=hannes@cmpxchg.org \
--cc=hughd@google.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
--cc=lizefan@huawei.com \
--cc=mhocko@suse.cz \
--cc=shawn.bohrer@gmail.com \
--cc=walken@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 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).