From: Waiman Long <longman@redhat.com>
To: Muchun Song <songmuchun@bytedance.com>,
hannes@cmpxchg.org, mhocko@kernel.org, roman.gushchin@linux.dev,
shakeelb@google.com
Cc: cgroups@vger.kernel.org, linux-mm@kvack.org,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, duanxiongchun@bytedance.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 03/11] mm: memcontrol: make lruvec lock safe when LRU pages are reparented
Date: Tue, 24 May 2022 15:23:11 -0400 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <f55976e6-d209-32c2-504d-f73a9b504511@redhat.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20220524060551.80037-4-songmuchun@bytedance.com>
On 5/24/22 02:05, Muchun Song wrote:
> The diagram below shows how to make the folio lruvec lock safe when LRU
> pages are reparented.
>
> folio_lruvec_lock(folio)
> retry:
> lruvec = folio_lruvec(folio);
>
> // The folio is reparented at this time.
> spin_lock(&lruvec->lru_lock);
>
> if (unlikely(lruvec_memcg(lruvec) != folio_memcg(folio)))
> // Acquired the wrong lruvec lock and need to retry.
> // Because this folio is on the parent memcg lruvec list.
> goto retry;
>
> // If we reach here, it means that folio_memcg(folio) is stable.
>
> memcg_reparent_objcgs(memcg)
> // lruvec belongs to memcg and lruvec_parent belongs to parent memcg.
> spin_lock(&lruvec->lru_lock);
> spin_lock(&lruvec_parent->lru_lock);
>
> // Move all the pages from the lruvec list to the parent lruvec list.
>
> spin_unlock(&lruvec_parent->lru_lock);
> spin_unlock(&lruvec->lru_lock);
>
> After we acquire the lruvec lock, we need to check whether the folio is
> reparented. If so, we need to reacquire the new lruvec lock. On the
> routine of the LRU pages reparenting, we will also acquire the lruvec
> lock (will be implemented in the later patch). So folio_memcg() cannot
> be changed when we hold the lruvec lock.
>
> Since lruvec_memcg(lruvec) is always equal to folio_memcg(folio) after
> we hold the lruvec lock, lruvec_memcg_debug() check is pointless. So
> remove it.
>
> This is a preparation for reparenting the LRU pages.
>
> Signed-off-by: Muchun Song <songmuchun@bytedance.com>
> ---
> include/linux/memcontrol.h | 18 +++-----------
> mm/compaction.c | 10 +++++++-
> mm/memcontrol.c | 62 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++-----------------
> mm/swap.c | 4 +++
> 4 files changed, 55 insertions(+), 39 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/include/linux/memcontrol.h b/include/linux/memcontrol.h
> index ff1c1dd7e762..4042e4d21fe2 100644
> --- a/include/linux/memcontrol.h
> +++ b/include/linux/memcontrol.h
> @@ -752,7 +752,9 @@ static inline struct lruvec *mem_cgroup_lruvec(struct mem_cgroup *memcg,
> * folio_lruvec - return lruvec for isolating/putting an LRU folio
> * @folio: Pointer to the folio.
> *
> - * This function relies on folio->mem_cgroup being stable.
> + * The lruvec can be changed to its parent lruvec when the page reparented.
> + * The caller need to recheck if it cares about this changes (just like
> + * folio_lruvec_lock() does).
> */
> static inline struct lruvec *folio_lruvec(struct folio *folio)
> {
> @@ -771,15 +773,6 @@ struct lruvec *folio_lruvec_lock_irq(struct folio *folio);
> struct lruvec *folio_lruvec_lock_irqsave(struct folio *folio,
> unsigned long *flags);
>
> -#ifdef CONFIG_DEBUG_VM
> -void lruvec_memcg_debug(struct lruvec *lruvec, struct folio *folio);
> -#else
> -static inline
> -void lruvec_memcg_debug(struct lruvec *lruvec, struct folio *folio)
> -{
> -}
> -#endif
> -
> static inline
> struct mem_cgroup *mem_cgroup_from_css(struct cgroup_subsys_state *css){
> return css ? container_of(css, struct mem_cgroup, css) : NULL;
> @@ -1240,11 +1233,6 @@ static inline struct lruvec *folio_lruvec(struct folio *folio)
> return &pgdat->__lruvec;
> }
>
> -static inline
> -void lruvec_memcg_debug(struct lruvec *lruvec, struct folio *folio)
> -{
> -}
> -
> static inline struct mem_cgroup *parent_mem_cgroup(struct mem_cgroup *memcg)
> {
> return NULL;
> diff --git a/mm/compaction.c b/mm/compaction.c
> index 817098817302..1692b17db781 100644
> --- a/mm/compaction.c
> +++ b/mm/compaction.c
> @@ -515,6 +515,8 @@ compact_folio_lruvec_lock_irqsave(struct folio *folio, unsigned long *flags,
> {
> struct lruvec *lruvec;
>
> + rcu_read_lock();
> +retry:
> lruvec = folio_lruvec(folio);
>
> /* Track if the lock is contended in async mode */
> @@ -527,7 +529,13 @@ compact_folio_lruvec_lock_irqsave(struct folio *folio, unsigned long *flags,
>
> spin_lock_irqsave(&lruvec->lru_lock, *flags);
> out:
> - lruvec_memcg_debug(lruvec, folio);
> + if (unlikely(lruvec_memcg(lruvec) != folio_memcg(folio))) {
> + spin_unlock_irqrestore(&lruvec->lru_lock, *flags);
> + goto retry;
> + }
> +
> + /* See the comments in folio_lruvec_lock(). */
> + rcu_read_unlock();
>
> return lruvec;
> }
> diff --git a/mm/memcontrol.c b/mm/memcontrol.c
> index 6de0d3e53eb1..b38a77f6696f 100644
> --- a/mm/memcontrol.c
> +++ b/mm/memcontrol.c
> @@ -1199,23 +1199,6 @@ int mem_cgroup_scan_tasks(struct mem_cgroup *memcg,
> return ret;
> }
>
> -#ifdef CONFIG_DEBUG_VM
> -void lruvec_memcg_debug(struct lruvec *lruvec, struct folio *folio)
> -{
> - struct mem_cgroup *memcg;
> -
> - if (mem_cgroup_disabled())
> - return;
> -
> - memcg = folio_memcg(folio);
> -
> - if (!memcg)
> - VM_BUG_ON_FOLIO(lruvec_memcg(lruvec) != root_mem_cgroup, folio);
> - else
> - VM_BUG_ON_FOLIO(lruvec_memcg(lruvec) != memcg, folio);
> -}
> -#endif
> -
> /**
> * folio_lruvec_lock - Lock the lruvec for a folio.
> * @folio: Pointer to the folio.
> @@ -1230,10 +1213,23 @@ void lruvec_memcg_debug(struct lruvec *lruvec, struct folio *folio)
> */
> struct lruvec *folio_lruvec_lock(struct folio *folio)
> {
> - struct lruvec *lruvec = folio_lruvec(folio);
> + struct lruvec *lruvec;
>
> + rcu_read_lock();
> +retry:
> + lruvec = folio_lruvec(folio);
> spin_lock(&lruvec->lru_lock);
> - lruvec_memcg_debug(lruvec, folio);
> +
> + if (unlikely(lruvec_memcg(lruvec) != folio_memcg(folio))) {
> + spin_unlock(&lruvec->lru_lock);
> + goto retry;
> + }
> +
> + /*
> + * Preemption is disabled in the internal of spin_lock, which can serve
> + * as RCU read-side critical sections.
> + */
What is the point of this comment as preemption is not disabled for
PREEMPT_RT kernel?
> + rcu_read_unlock();
>
> return lruvec;
> }
> @@ -1253,10 +1249,20 @@ struct lruvec *folio_lruvec_lock(struct folio *folio)
> */
> struct lruvec *folio_lruvec_lock_irq(struct folio *folio)
> {
> - struct lruvec *lruvec = folio_lruvec(folio);
> + struct lruvec *lruvec;
>
> + rcu_read_lock();
> +retry:
> + lruvec = folio_lruvec(folio);
> spin_lock_irq(&lruvec->lru_lock);
> - lruvec_memcg_debug(lruvec, folio);
> +
> + if (unlikely(lruvec_memcg(lruvec) != folio_memcg(folio))) {
> + spin_unlock_irq(&lruvec->lru_lock);
> + goto retry;
> + }
> +
> + /* See the comments in folio_lruvec_lock(). */
> + rcu_read_unlock();
>
> return lruvec;
> }
> @@ -1278,10 +1284,20 @@ struct lruvec *folio_lruvec_lock_irq(struct folio *folio)
> struct lruvec *folio_lruvec_lock_irqsave(struct folio *folio,
> unsigned long *flags)
> {
> - struct lruvec *lruvec = folio_lruvec(folio);
> + struct lruvec *lruvec;
>
> + rcu_read_lock();
> +retry:
> + lruvec = folio_lruvec(folio);
> spin_lock_irqsave(&lruvec->lru_lock, *flags);
> - lruvec_memcg_debug(lruvec, folio);
> +
> + if (unlikely(lruvec_memcg(lruvec) != folio_memcg(folio))) {
> + spin_unlock_irqrestore(&lruvec->lru_lock, *flags);
> + goto retry;
> + }
> +
> + /* See the comments in folio_lruvec_lock(). */
> + rcu_read_unlock();
>
> return lruvec;
> }
> diff --git a/mm/swap.c b/mm/swap.c
> index 7e320ec08c6a..9680f2fc48b1 100644
> --- a/mm/swap.c
> +++ b/mm/swap.c
> @@ -303,6 +303,10 @@ void lru_note_cost(struct lruvec *lruvec, bool file, unsigned int nr_pages)
>
> void lru_note_cost_folio(struct folio *folio)
> {
> + /*
> + * The rcu read lock is held by the caller, so we do not need to
> + * care about the lruvec returned by folio_lruvec() being released.
> + */
Maybe we can add "WARN_ON_ONCE(!rcu_read_lock_held())" to be sure.
> lru_note_cost(folio_lruvec(folio), folio_is_file_lru(folio),
> folio_nr_pages(folio));
> }
Cheers,
Longman
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2022-05-24 19:23 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 48+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2022-05-24 6:05 [PATCH v4 00/11] Use obj_cgroup APIs to charge the LRU pages Muchun Song
2022-05-24 6:05 ` [PATCH v4 01/11] mm: memcontrol: prepare objcg API for non-kmem usage Muchun Song
2022-05-24 19:01 ` Johannes Weiner
2022-05-25 8:46 ` Muchun Song
2022-05-25 2:36 ` Roman Gushchin
2022-05-25 7:57 ` Muchun Song
2022-05-25 12:37 ` Johannes Weiner
2022-05-25 13:08 ` Muchun Song
2022-05-24 6:05 ` [PATCH v4 02/11] mm: memcontrol: introduce compact_folio_lruvec_lock_irqsave Muchun Song
2022-05-24 19:22 ` Johannes Weiner
2022-05-25 9:38 ` Muchun Song
2022-05-24 6:05 ` [PATCH v4 03/11] mm: memcontrol: make lruvec lock safe when LRU pages are reparented Muchun Song
2022-05-24 19:23 ` Waiman Long [this message]
2022-05-25 10:20 ` Muchun Song
2022-05-25 14:59 ` Waiman Long
2022-05-24 19:27 ` Johannes Weiner
2022-05-25 9:53 ` Muchun Song
2022-05-25 12:30 ` Johannes Weiner
2022-05-25 13:03 ` Muchun Song
2022-05-25 14:48 ` Johannes Weiner
2022-05-25 15:38 ` Muchun Song
2022-05-26 20:17 ` Waiman Long
2022-05-27 2:55 ` Muchun Song
2022-05-24 6:05 ` [PATCH v4 04/11] mm: vmscan: rework move_pages_to_lru() Muchun Song
2022-05-24 19:38 ` Johannes Weiner
2022-05-25 11:38 ` Muchun Song
2022-05-24 19:52 ` Waiman Long
2022-05-25 11:43 ` Muchun Song
2022-05-25 2:43 ` Roman Gushchin
2022-05-25 11:41 ` Muchun Song
2022-05-24 6:05 ` [PATCH v4 05/11] mm: thp: introduce folio_split_queue_lock{_irqsave}() Muchun Song
2022-05-24 6:05 ` [PATCH v4 06/11] mm: thp: make split queue lock safe when LRU pages are reparented Muchun Song
2022-05-25 2:54 ` Roman Gushchin
2022-05-25 11:44 ` Muchun Song
2022-05-24 6:05 ` [PATCH v4 07/11] mm: memcontrol: make all the callers of {folio,page}_memcg() safe Muchun Song
2022-05-25 3:03 ` Roman Gushchin
2022-05-25 11:51 ` Muchun Song
2022-05-24 6:05 ` [PATCH v4 08/11] mm: memcontrol: introduce memcg_reparent_ops Muchun Song
2022-05-24 6:05 ` [PATCH v4 09/11] mm: memcontrol: use obj_cgroup APIs to charge the LRU pages Muchun Song
2022-05-24 12:29 ` kernel test robot
2022-05-24 18:16 ` kernel test robot
2022-05-25 7:14 ` [mm] bec0ae1210: WARNING:possible_recursive_locking_detected kernel test robot
2022-05-24 6:05 ` [PATCH v4 10/11] mm: lru: add VM_BUG_ON_FOLIO to lru maintenance function Muchun Song
2022-05-24 19:44 ` Johannes Weiner
2022-05-25 11:59 ` Muchun Song
2022-05-25 2:40 ` Roman Gushchin
2022-05-25 11:58 ` Muchun Song
2022-05-24 6:05 ` [PATCH v4 11/11] mm: lru: use lruvec lock to serialize memcg changes Muchun Song
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=f55976e6-d209-32c2-504d-f73a9b504511@redhat.com \
--to=longman@redhat.com \
--cc=cgroups@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=duanxiongchun@bytedance.com \
--cc=hannes@cmpxchg.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
--cc=mhocko@kernel.org \
--cc=roman.gushchin@linux.dev \
--cc=shakeelb@google.com \
--cc=songmuchun@bytedance.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).