linux-mm.kvack.org archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Johannes Weiner <hannes@cmpxchg.org>
To: Michal Hocko <mhocko@suse.com>
Cc: Nhat Pham <nphamcs@gmail.com>,
	akpm@linux-foundation.org, riel@surriel.com,
	roman.gushchin@linux.dev, shakeelb@google.com,
	muchun.song@linux.dev, tj@kernel.org, lizefan.x@bytedance.com,
	shuah@kernel.org, mike.kravetz@oracle.com, yosryahmed@google.com,
	linux-mm@kvack.org, kernel-team@meta.com,
	linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, cgroups@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 1/2] hugetlb: memcg: account hugetlb-backed memory in memory controller
Date: Mon, 2 Oct 2023 11:25:55 -0400	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20231002152555.GA5054@cmpxchg.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <ZRrc8hv4t740MZar@dhcp22.suse.cz>

On Mon, Oct 02, 2023 at 05:08:34PM +0200, Michal Hocko wrote:
> On Mon 02-10-23 10:50:26, Johannes Weiner wrote:
> > On Mon, Oct 02, 2023 at 03:43:19PM +0200, Michal Hocko wrote:
> > > On Wed 27-09-23 17:57:22, Nhat Pham wrote:
> [...]
> > > - memcg limit reclaim doesn't assist hugetlb pages allocation when
> > >   hugetlb overcommit is configured (i.e. pages are not consumed from the
> > >   pool) which means that the page allocation might disrupt workloads
> > >   from other memcgs.
> > > - failure to charge a hugetlb page results in SIGBUS rather
> > >   than memcg oom killer. That could be the case even if the
> > >   hugetlb pool still has pages available and there is
> > >   reclaimable memory in the memcg.
> > 
> > Are these actually true? AFAICS, regardless of whether the page comes
> > from the pool or the buddy allocator, the memcg code will go through
> > the regular charge path, attempt reclaim, and OOM if that fails.
> 
> OK, I should have been more explicit. Let me expand. Charges are
> accounted only _after_ the actual allocation is done. So the actual
> allocation is not constrained by the memcg context. It might reclaim
> from the memcg at that time but the disruption could have already
> happened. Not really any different from regular memory allocation
> attempt but much more visible with GB pages and one could reasonably
> expect that memcg should stop such a GB allocation if the local reclaim
> would be hopeless to free up enough from its own consumption.
> 
> Makes more sense?

Yes, that makes sense.

This should be fairly easy to address by having hugetlb do the split
transaction that charge_memcg() does in one go, similar to what we do
for the hugetlb controller as well. IOW,

alloc_hugetlb_folio()
{
	if (mem_cgroup_hugetlb_try_charge())
		return ERR_PTR(-ENOMEM);

	folio = dequeue();
	if (!folio) {
		folio = alloc_buddy();
		if (!folio)
			goto uncharge;
	}

	mem_cgroup_hugetlb_commit_charge();
}


  reply	other threads:[~2023-10-02 15:26 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 26+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2023-09-28  0:57 [PATCH v2 0/2] hugetlb memcg accounting Nhat Pham
2023-09-28  0:57 ` [PATCH v2 1/2] hugetlb: memcg: account hugetlb-backed memory in memory controller Nhat Pham
2023-09-28 22:59   ` Frank van der Linden
2023-09-29  0:33     ` Nhat Pham
2023-09-29  0:38   ` Yosry Ahmed
2023-09-29  0:58     ` Nhat Pham
2023-09-29  1:07       ` Nhat Pham
2023-09-29  1:18         ` Yosry Ahmed
2023-09-29  1:25           ` Nhat Pham
2023-09-29 15:08           ` Johannes Weiner
2023-09-29 15:11             ` Yosry Ahmed
2023-09-29 17:42               ` Johannes Weiner
2023-09-29 17:48                 ` Nhat Pham
2023-09-29 18:07                 ` Frank van der Linden
2023-10-02 12:18                 ` Michal Hocko
2023-09-29 18:17   ` [PATCH v2 1/2] hugetlb: memcg: account hugetlb-backed memory in memory controller (fix) Nhat Pham
2023-09-29 18:19     ` Nhat Pham
2023-10-02 13:43   ` [PATCH v2 1/2] hugetlb: memcg: account hugetlb-backed memory in memory controller Michal Hocko
2023-10-02 14:50     ` Johannes Weiner
2023-10-02 15:08       ` Michal Hocko
2023-10-02 15:25         ` Johannes Weiner [this message]
2023-10-02 17:32           ` Nhat Pham
2023-10-03  9:17           ` Michal Hocko
2023-10-02 16:21     ` Johannes Weiner
2023-10-02 17:28     ` Nhat Pham
2023-09-28  0:57 ` [PATCH v2 2/2] selftests: add a selftest to verify hugetlb usage in memcg Nhat Pham

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=20231002152555.GA5054@cmpxchg.org \
    --to=hannes@cmpxchg.org \
    --cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
    --cc=cgroups@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=kernel-team@meta.com \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
    --cc=lizefan.x@bytedance.com \
    --cc=mhocko@suse.com \
    --cc=mike.kravetz@oracle.com \
    --cc=muchun.song@linux.dev \
    --cc=nphamcs@gmail.com \
    --cc=riel@surriel.com \
    --cc=roman.gushchin@linux.dev \
    --cc=shakeelb@google.com \
    --cc=shuah@kernel.org \
    --cc=tj@kernel.org \
    --cc=yosryahmed@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).