The Linux Kernel Mailing List
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Shakeel Butt <shakeel.butt@linux.dev>
To: Hui Zhu <hui.zhu@linux.dev>
Cc: Johannes Weiner <hannes@cmpxchg.org>,
	Michal Hocko <mhocko@kernel.org>,
	 Roman Gushchin <roman.gushchin@linux.dev>,
	Muchun Song <muchun.song@linux.dev>,
	 Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
	Sebastian Andrzej Siewior <bigeasy@linutronix.de>,
	 Clark Williams <clrkwllms@kernel.org>,
	Steven Rostedt <rostedt@goodmis.org>,
	cgroups@vger.kernel.org,  linux-mm@kvack.org,
	linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-rt-devel@lists.linux.dev,
	 Hui Zhu <zhuhui@kylinos.cn>
Subject: Re: [RESEND PATCH v2] mm/memcontrol: Avoid stuck FLUSHING_CACHED_CHARGE on isolated CPU
Date: Tue, 30 Jun 2026 08:07:47 -0700	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <akPbL3HZrvWy8O3Q@linux.dev> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20260630070004.470181-1-hui.zhu@linux.dev>

On Tue, Jun 30, 2026 at 03:00:04PM +0800, Hui Zhu wrote:
> From: Hui Zhu <zhuhui@kylinos.cn>
> 
> drain_all_stock() sets FLUSHING_CACHED_CHARGE before calling
> schedule_drain_work() to queue per-CPU drain work.  When the target
> CPU is isolated (cpu_is_isolated() == true), the work is silently
> not queued, but FLUSHING_CACHED_CHARGE stays set.  Every subsequent
> drain_all_stock() then sees the bit and skips this stock entirely,
> so the entry is effectively pinned until something else on that CPU
> runs drain_local_*_stock() and clears the bit -- which on a long-
> isolated CPU may never happen.
> 
> The original idea was to actually perform the drain from the calling
> CPU on behalf of the isolated one, by adding a lock around the
> per-CPU stock so that a remote drainer could safely touch it.  In
> practice this turned out to be intrusive: the stock data structures
> and their fast paths (consume_stock(), refill_stock(), the obj_stock
> helpers) are deliberately designed around current-CPU-only access,
> and retrofitting cross-CPU serialisation onto them adds non-trivial
> locking and PREEMPT_RT concerns for very little gain.
> 
> Looking at the actual amount of charge that can accumulate in a
> single per-CPU stock, it is bounded and small, so leaving an
> isolated CPU's stock undrained for a while is not a real problem.
> The only real bug is that the stuck FLUSHING_CACHED_CHARGE bit
> prevents future drain_all_stock() callers from re-attempting once
> the CPU is no longer isolated.
> 
> Fix this minimally by clearing FLUSHING_CACHED_CHARGE when the work
> could not be queued because the target CPU is isolated.  The cached
> charge itself is left in place; it will be released the next time
> the CPU runs drain_local_*_stock() (e.g. after leaving isolation,
> or if the isolated CPU itself calls drain_all_stock() -- in that
> case cpu == curcpu causes drain_local_memcg_stock() to be invoked
> directly), and the next drain_all_stock() call is free to retry
> instead of skipping the stock forever.
> 
> Fixes: 6a792697a53a ("memcg: do not drain charge pcp caches on remote isolated cpus")
> Signed-off-by: Hui Zhu <zhuhui@kylinos.cn>
> ---
> Changelog:
> v2:
> According to the comments of Waiman Long, updated fixes.
> 
>  mm/memcontrol.c | 28 ++++++++++++++++++++++------
>  1 file changed, 22 insertions(+), 6 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/mm/memcontrol.c b/mm/memcontrol.c
> index 6dc4888a90f3..2e66b4a2c25d 100644
> --- a/mm/memcontrol.c
> +++ b/mm/memcontrol.c
> @@ -2256,7 +2256,8 @@ static bool is_memcg_drain_needed(struct memcg_stock_pcp *stock,
>  	return flush;
>  }
>  
> -static void schedule_drain_work(int cpu, struct work_struct *work)
> +static void
> +schedule_drain_work(int cpu, struct work_struct *work, unsigned long *flags)
>  {
>  	/*
>  	 * Protect housekeeping cpumask read and work enqueue together
> @@ -2264,9 +2265,22 @@ static void schedule_drain_work(int cpu, struct work_struct *work)
>  	 * partition update only need to wait for an RCU GP and flush the
>  	 * pending work on newly isolated CPUs.
>  	 */
> -	guard(rcu)();
> -	if (!cpu_is_isolated(cpu))
> -		queue_work_on(cpu, memcg_wq, work);
> +	scoped_guard(rcu) {
> +		if (!cpu_is_isolated(cpu)) {
> +			queue_work_on(cpu, memcg_wq, work);
> +			return;
> +		}
> +	}
> +
> +	/*
> +	 * The target CPU is isolated: the drain work was not queued.
> +	 * Clear FLUSHING_CACHED_CHARGE so that future drain_all_stock()
> +	 * callers can re-attempt instead of skipping this stock forever.
> +	 * The cached charge is left in place; it will be released the
> +	 * next time the CPU itself runs drain_local_*_stock() (e.g.
> +	 * after leaving isolation), or by a follow-up mechanism.
> +	 */
> +	clear_bit(FLUSHING_CACHED_CHARGE, flags);

Let's do something like the following.

	guard(rcu)();
	if (cpu_is_isolated(cpu)) {
		clear_bit(FLUSHING_CACHED_CHARGE, flags);
		return;
	}
	queue_work_on(cpu, memcg_wq, work);

>  }
>  
>  /*
> @@ -2299,7 +2313,8 @@ void drain_all_stock(struct mem_cgroup *root_memcg)
>  			if (cpu == curcpu)
>  				drain_local_memcg_stock(&memcg_st->work);
>  			else
> -				schedule_drain_work(cpu, &memcg_st->work);
> +				schedule_drain_work(cpu, &memcg_st->work,
> +						    &memcg_st->flags);
>  		}
>  
>  		if (!test_bit(FLUSHING_CACHED_CHARGE, &obj_st->flags) &&
> @@ -2309,7 +2324,8 @@ void drain_all_stock(struct mem_cgroup *root_memcg)
>  			if (cpu == curcpu)
>  				drain_local_obj_stock(&obj_st->work);
>  			else
> -				schedule_drain_work(cpu, &obj_st->work);
> +				schedule_drain_work(cpu, &obj_st->work,
> +						    &obj_st->flags);
>  		}
>  	}
>  	migrate_enable();
> -- 
> 2.43.0
> 

  reply	other threads:[~2026-06-30 15:08 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 3+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2026-06-30  7:00 [RESEND PATCH v2] mm/memcontrol: Avoid stuck FLUSHING_CACHED_CHARGE on isolated CPU Hui Zhu
2026-06-30 15:07 ` Shakeel Butt [this message]
2026-06-30 16:22 ` Joshua Hahn

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=akPbL3HZrvWy8O3Q@linux.dev \
    --to=shakeel.butt@linux.dev \
    --cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
    --cc=bigeasy@linutronix.de \
    --cc=cgroups@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=clrkwllms@kernel.org \
    --cc=hannes@cmpxchg.org \
    --cc=hui.zhu@linux.dev \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
    --cc=linux-rt-devel@lists.linux.dev \
    --cc=mhocko@kernel.org \
    --cc=muchun.song@linux.dev \
    --cc=roman.gushchin@linux.dev \
    --cc=rostedt@goodmis.org \
    --cc=zhuhui@kylinos.cn \
    /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