From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.8 required=3.0 tests=DKIMWL_WL_HIGH,DKIM_SIGNED, DKIM_VALID,HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SPF_HELO_NONE, SPF_PASS,URIBL_BLOCKED autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 589EBC0650F for ; Thu, 8 Aug 2019 23:03:01 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [209.132.180.67]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1C7592173C for ; Thu, 8 Aug 2019 23:03:01 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=kernel.org; s=default; t=1565305381; bh=wZTH8XgTxxxVDsQPmD/QFT6okbtnIXw2oHs1b6PpWBQ=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:In-Reply-To:References:List-ID:From; b=DltqYB3Akhs3T+qLzWlrgD3imeM7UxZ4FbiX3ICz65fdFyo18XiYoUhWsv66BUz59 WyVRmOEO1iXWCCO0HYiFYTrhb22rN1j35GNUu2pCcrBiHPQLQoPk7UAFGqUBfhyyy4 lme7wJQWCOLbidUsR2uifUx0hUXTReVfdYFzPCDo= Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S2404541AbfHHXDA (ORCPT ); Thu, 8 Aug 2019 19:03:00 -0400 Received: from mail.kernel.org ([198.145.29.99]:44424 "EHLO mail.kernel.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1731914AbfHHXC7 (ORCPT ); Thu, 8 Aug 2019 19:02:59 -0400 Received: from localhost.localdomain (c-73-223-200-170.hsd1.ca.comcast.net [73.223.200.170]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 925222173E; Thu, 8 Aug 2019 23:02:58 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=kernel.org; s=default; t=1565305378; bh=wZTH8XgTxxxVDsQPmD/QFT6okbtnIXw2oHs1b6PpWBQ=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:In-Reply-To:References:From; b=UDBUExSYm5sCUD0TghXG06OJsGqPu1AZfFGCiep9coMJJWoxYuTgOrUbpq3rhPlbK P4mxpyszZn3CduH+ZquqIGCSZtQsYq2m8lpFlOinhHVXzA5Y6T/Q2/RjMtDHbkfL1T HQVHpeuUaWr/qz9fOvQvXscbDoInTLdElTBfNXWU= Date: Thu, 8 Aug 2019 16:02:57 -0700 From: Andrew Morton To: Roman Gushchin Cc: "linux-mm@kvack.org" , Michal Hocko , Johannes Weiner , "linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" , Kernel Team Subject: Re: [PATCH] mm: memcontrol: flush slab vmstats on kmem offlining Message-Id: <20190808160257.bce08b5ae1574414f96ee26b@linux-foundation.org> In-Reply-To: <20190808214706.GA24864@tower.dhcp.thefacebook.com> References: <20190808203604.3413318-1-guro@fb.com> <20190808142146.a328cd673c66d5fdbca26f79@linux-foundation.org> <20190808214706.GA24864@tower.dhcp.thefacebook.com> X-Mailer: Sylpheed 3.5.1 (GTK+ 2.24.31; x86_64-pc-linux-gnu) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Thu, 8 Aug 2019 21:47:11 +0000 Roman Gushchin wrote: > On Thu, Aug 08, 2019 at 02:21:46PM -0700, Andrew Morton wrote: > > On Thu, 8 Aug 2019 13:36:04 -0700 Roman Gushchin wrote: > > > > > I've noticed that the "slab" value in memory.stat is sometimes 0, > > > even if some children memory cgroups have a non-zero "slab" value. > > > The following investigation showed that this is the result > > > of the kmem_cache reparenting in combination with the per-cpu > > > batching of slab vmstats. > > > > > > At the offlining some vmstat value may leave in the percpu cache, > > > not being propagated upwards by the cgroup hierarchy. It means > > > that stats on ancestor levels are lower than actual. Later when > > > slab pages are released, the precise number of pages is substracted > > > on the parent level, making the value negative. We don't show negative > > > values, 0 is printed instead. > > > > > > To fix this issue, let's flush percpu slab memcg and lruvec stats > > > on memcg offlining. This guarantees that numbers on all ancestor > > > levels are accurate and match the actual number of outstanding > > > slab pages. > > > > > > > Looks expensive. How frequently can these functions be called? > > Once per memcg lifetime. iirc there are some workloads in which this can be rapid? > > > + for_each_node(node) > > > + memcg_flush_slab_node_stats(memcg, node); > > > > This loops across all possible CPUs once for each possible node. Ouch. > > > > Implementing hotplug handlers in here (which is surprisingly simple) > > brings this down to num_online_nodes * num_online_cpus which is, I > > think, potentially vastly better. > > > > Hm, maybe I'm biased because we don't play much with offlining, and > don't have many NUMA nodes. What's the real world scenario? Disabling > hyperthreading? I assume it's machines which could take a large number of CPUs but in fact have few. I've asked this in response to many patches down the ages and have never really got a clear answer. A concern is that if such machines do exist, it will take a long time for the regression reports to get to us. Especially if such machines are rare. > Idk, given that it happens once per memcg lifetime, and memcg destruction > isn't cheap anyway, I'm not sure it worth it. But if you are, I'm happy > to add hotplug handlers. I think it's worth taking a look. As I mentioned, it can turn out to be stupidly simple. > I also thought about merging per-memcg stats and per-memcg-per-node stats > (reading part can aggregate over 2? 4? numa nodes each time). That will > make everything overall cheaper. But it's a separate topic.