linux-mm.kvack.org archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Martin KaFai Lau <martin.lau@linux.dev>
To: Roman Gushchin <roman.gushchin@linux.dev>
Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org>,
	Suren Baghdasaryan <surenb@google.com>,
	Michal Hocko <mhocko@kernel.org>,
	Shakeel Butt <shakeel.butt@linux.dev>,
	Johannes Weiner <hannes@cmpxchg.org>,
	Andrii Nakryiko <andrii@kernel.org>,
	JP Kobryn <inwardvessel@gmail.com>,
	linux-mm@kvack.org, cgroups@vger.kernel.org, bpf@vger.kernel.org,
	Martin KaFai Lau <martin.lau@kernel.org>,
	Song Liu <song@kernel.org>,
	Kumar Kartikeya Dwivedi <memxor@gmail.com>,
	Tejun Heo <tj@kernel.org>,
	Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 06/23] mm: introduce BPF struct ops for OOM handling
Date: Wed, 29 Oct 2025 17:20:59 -0700	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <e8110233-0028-48e3-8850-fcf1ba528ca6@linux.dev> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20251027231727.472628-7-roman.gushchin@linux.dev>

On 10/27/25 4:17 PM, Roman Gushchin wrote:
> diff --git a/include/linux/bpf_oom.h b/include/linux/bpf_oom.h
> new file mode 100644
> index 000000000000..18c32a5a068b
> --- /dev/null
> +++ b/include/linux/bpf_oom.h
> @@ -0,0 +1,74 @@
> +/* SPDX-License-Identifier: GPL-2.0+ */
> +
> +#ifndef __BPF_OOM_H
> +#define __BPF_OOM_H
> +
> +struct oom_control;
> +
> +#define BPF_OOM_NAME_MAX_LEN 64
> +
> +struct bpf_oom_ctx {
> +	/*
> +	 * If bpf_oom_ops is attached to a cgroup, id of this cgroup.
> +	 * 0 otherwise.
> +	 */
> +	u64 cgroup_id;
> +};

A function argument can be added to the ops (e.g. handle_out_of_memory) 
in the future. afaict, I don't see it will disrupt the existing bpf prog 
as long as it does not change the ordering of the existing arguments.

If it goes down the 'struct bpf_oom_ctx" abstraction path, all future 
new members of the 'struct bpf_oom_ctx' will need to be initialized even 
they may not be useful for most of the existing ops.

For networking use case, I am quite sure the wrapping is unnecessary. I 
will leave it as fruit of thoughts here for this use case.

> +static int bpf_oom_ops_reg(void *kdata, struct bpf_link *link)
> +{
> +	struct bpf_struct_ops_link *ops_link = container_of(link, struct bpf_struct_ops_link, link);

link could be NULL here. "return -EOPNOTSUPP" for the legacy kdata reg 
that does not use the link api.

In the future, we should enforce link must be used in the 
bpf_struct_ops.c except for a few of the existing struct_ops kernel users.

> +	struct bpf_oom_ops **bpf_oom_ops_ptr = NULL;
> +	struct bpf_oom_ops *bpf_oom_ops = kdata;
> +	struct mem_cgroup *memcg = NULL;
> +	int err = 0;
> +
> +	if (IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_MEMCG) && ops_link->cgroup_id) {
> +		/* Attach to a memory cgroup? */
> +		memcg = mem_cgroup_get_from_ino(ops_link->cgroup_id);
> +		if (IS_ERR_OR_NULL(memcg))
> +			return PTR_ERR(memcg);
> +		bpf_oom_ops_ptr = bpf_oom_memcg_ops_ptr(memcg);
> +	} else {
> +		/* System-wide OOM handler */
> +		bpf_oom_ops_ptr = &system_bpf_oom;
> +	}
> +
> +	/* Another struct ops attached? */
> +	if (READ_ONCE(*bpf_oom_ops_ptr)) {
> +		err = -EBUSY;
> +		goto exit;
> +	}
> +
> +	/* Expose bpf_oom_ops structure */
> +	WRITE_ONCE(*bpf_oom_ops_ptr, bpf_oom_ops);
> +exit:
> +	mem_cgroup_put(memcg);
> +	return err;
> +}
> +
> +static void bpf_oom_ops_unreg(void *kdata, struct bpf_link *link)
> +{
> +	struct bpf_struct_ops_link *ops_link = container_of(link, struct bpf_struct_ops_link, link);
> +	struct bpf_oom_ops **bpf_oom_ops_ptr = NULL;
> +	struct bpf_oom_ops *bpf_oom_ops = kdata;
> +	struct mem_cgroup *memcg = NULL;
> +
> +	if (IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_MEMCG) && ops_link->cgroup_id) {
> +		/* Detach from a memory cgroup? */
> +		memcg = mem_cgroup_get_from_ino(ops_link->cgroup_id);
> +		if (IS_ERR_OR_NULL(memcg))
> +			goto exit;
> +		bpf_oom_ops_ptr = bpf_oom_memcg_ops_ptr(memcg);
> +	} else {
> +		/* System-wide OOM handler */
> +		bpf_oom_ops_ptr = &system_bpf_oom;
> +	}
> +
> +	/* Hide bpf_oom_ops from new callers */
> +	if (!WARN_ON(READ_ONCE(*bpf_oom_ops_ptr) != bpf_oom_ops))
> +		WRITE_ONCE(*bpf_oom_ops_ptr, NULL);
> +
> +	mem_cgroup_put(memcg);
> +
> +exit:
> +	/* Release bpf_oom_ops after a srcu grace period */
> +	synchronize_srcu(&bpf_oom_srcu);
> +}
> +
> +#ifdef CONFIG_MEMCG
> +void bpf_oom_memcg_offline(struct mem_cgroup *memcg)

Is it when the memcg/cgroup is going away? I think it should also call 
bpf_struct_ops_map_link_detach (through link->ops->detach [1]). It will 
notify the user space which may poll on the link fd. This will also call 
the bpf_oom_ops_unreg above.

[1] 
https://lore.kernel.org/all/20240530065946.979330-7-thinker.li@gmail.com/

> +{
> +	struct bpf_oom_ops *bpf_oom_ops;
> +	struct bpf_oom_ctx exec_ctx;
> +	u64 cgrp_id;
> +	int idx;
> +
> +	/* All bpf_oom_ops structures are protected using bpf_oom_srcu */
> +	idx = srcu_read_lock(&bpf_oom_srcu);
> +
> +	bpf_oom_ops = READ_ONCE(memcg->bpf_oom);
> +	WRITE_ONCE(memcg->bpf_oom, NULL);
> +
> +	if (bpf_oom_ops && bpf_oom_ops->handle_cgroup_offline) {
> +		cgrp_id = cgroup_id(memcg->css.cgroup);
> +		exec_ctx.cgroup_id = cgrp_id;
> +		bpf_oom_ops->handle_cgroup_offline(&exec_ctx, cgrp_id);
> +	}
> +
> +	srcu_read_unlock(&bpf_oom_srcu, idx);
> +}




  parent reply	other threads:[~2025-10-30  0:21 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 83+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2025-10-27 23:17 [PATCH v2 00/23] mm: BPF OOM Roman Gushchin
2025-10-27 23:17 ` [PATCH v2 01/23] bpf: move bpf_struct_ops_link into bpf.h Roman Gushchin
2025-10-27 23:17 ` [PATCH v2 02/23] bpf: initial support for attaching struct ops to cgroups Roman Gushchin
2025-10-27 23:48   ` bot+bpf-ci
2025-10-28 15:57     ` Roman Gushchin
2025-10-29 18:01   ` Song Liu
2025-10-29 20:26     ` Roman Gushchin
2025-10-30 17:22     ` Roman Gushchin
2025-10-30 18:03       ` Song Liu
2025-10-30 18:19         ` Amery Hung
2025-10-30 19:06           ` Roman Gushchin
2025-10-30 21:34             ` Song Liu
2025-10-30 22:42               ` Martin KaFai Lau
2025-10-30 23:14                 ` Roman Gushchin
2025-10-31  0:05                 ` Song Liu
2025-10-30 22:19             ` bpf_st_ops and cgroups. Was: " Alexei Starovoitov
2025-10-30 23:24               ` Roman Gushchin
2025-10-31  3:03                 ` Yafang Shao
2025-10-31  6:14                 ` Song Liu
2025-10-31 11:35                   ` Yafang Shao
2025-10-31 17:37                 ` Alexei Starovoitov
2025-10-29 18:14   ` Tejun Heo
2025-10-29 20:25     ` Roman Gushchin
2025-10-29 20:36       ` Tejun Heo
2025-10-29 21:18         ` Song Liu
2025-10-29 21:27           ` Tejun Heo
2025-10-29 21:37             ` Song Liu
2025-10-29 21:45               ` Tejun Heo
2025-10-30  4:32                 ` Song Liu
2025-10-30 16:13                   ` Tejun Heo
2025-10-30 17:56                     ` Song Liu
2025-10-29 21:53           ` Roman Gushchin
2025-10-29 22:43             ` Alexei Starovoitov
2025-10-29 22:53               ` Tejun Heo
2025-10-29 23:53                 ` Alexei Starovoitov
2025-10-30  0:03                   ` Tejun Heo
2025-10-30  0:16                     ` Alexei Starovoitov
2025-10-30  6:33                       ` Yafang Shao
2025-10-29 21:04   ` Song Liu
2025-10-30  0:43   ` Martin KaFai Lau
2025-10-27 23:17 ` [PATCH v2 03/23] bpf: mark struct oom_control's memcg field as TRUSTED_OR_NULL Roman Gushchin
2025-10-27 23:17 ` [PATCH v2 04/23] mm: define mem_cgroup_get_from_ino() outside of CONFIG_SHRINKER_DEBUG Roman Gushchin
2025-10-31  8:32   ` Michal Hocko
2025-10-27 23:17 ` [PATCH v2 05/23] mm: declare memcg_page_state_output() in memcontrol.h Roman Gushchin
2025-10-31  8:34   ` Michal Hocko
2025-10-27 23:17 ` [PATCH v2 06/23] mm: introduce BPF struct ops for OOM handling Roman Gushchin
2025-10-27 23:57   ` bot+bpf-ci
2025-10-28 17:45   ` Alexei Starovoitov
2025-10-28 18:42     ` Roman Gushchin
2025-10-28 22:07       ` Alexei Starovoitov
2025-10-28 22:56         ` Roman Gushchin
2025-10-28 21:33   ` Song Liu
2025-10-28 23:24     ` Roman Gushchin
2025-10-30  0:20   ` Martin KaFai Lau [this message]
2025-10-30  5:57   ` Yafang Shao
2025-10-30 14:26     ` Roman Gushchin
2025-10-31  9:02   ` Michal Hocko
2025-11-02 21:36     ` Roman Gushchin
2025-11-03 19:00       ` Michal Hocko
2025-11-04  1:45         ` Roman Gushchin
2025-11-04  8:18           ` Michal Hocko
2025-11-04 18:14             ` Roman Gushchin
2025-11-04 19:22               ` Michal Hocko
2025-10-27 23:17 ` [PATCH v2 07/23] mm: introduce bpf_oom_kill_process() bpf kfunc Roman Gushchin
2025-10-31  9:05   ` Michal Hocko
2025-11-02 21:09     ` Roman Gushchin
2025-10-27 23:17 ` [PATCH v2 08/23] mm: introduce BPF kfuncs to deal with memcg pointers Roman Gushchin
2025-10-27 23:48   ` bot+bpf-ci
2025-10-28 16:10     ` Roman Gushchin
2025-10-28 17:12       ` Alexei Starovoitov
2025-10-28 18:03         ` Chris Mason
2025-10-28 18:32           ` Roman Gushchin
2025-10-28 17:42   ` Tejun Heo
2025-10-28 18:12     ` Roman Gushchin
2025-10-27 23:17 ` [PATCH v2 09/23] mm: introduce bpf_get_root_mem_cgroup() BPF kfunc Roman Gushchin
2025-10-27 23:17 ` [PATCH v2 10/23] mm: introduce BPF kfuncs to access memcg statistics and events Roman Gushchin
2025-10-27 23:48   ` bot+bpf-ci
2025-10-28 16:16     ` Roman Gushchin
2025-10-31  9:08   ` Michal Hocko
2025-10-31  9:31 ` [PATCH v2 00/23] mm: BPF OOM Michal Hocko
2025-10-31 16:48   ` Lance Yang
2025-11-02 20:53   ` Roman Gushchin
2025-11-03 18:18     ` Michal Hocko

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=e8110233-0028-48e3-8850-fcf1ba528ca6@linux.dev \
    --to=martin.lau@linux.dev \
    --cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
    --cc=andrii@kernel.org \
    --cc=ast@kernel.org \
    --cc=bpf@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=cgroups@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=hannes@cmpxchg.org \
    --cc=inwardvessel@gmail.com \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
    --cc=martin.lau@kernel.org \
    --cc=memxor@gmail.com \
    --cc=mhocko@kernel.org \
    --cc=roman.gushchin@linux.dev \
    --cc=shakeel.butt@linux.dev \
    --cc=song@kernel.org \
    --cc=surenb@google.com \
    --cc=tj@kernel.org \
    /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).