From: Willem de Bruijn <willemdebruijn.kernel@gmail.com>
To: Shakeel Butt <shakeelb@google.com>
Cc: Abel Wu <wuyun.abel@bytedance.com>,
"David S . Miller" <davem@davemloft.net>,
Eric Dumazet <edumazet@google.com>,
Jakub Kicinski <kuba@kernel.org>, Paolo Abeni <pabeni@redhat.com>,
Johannes Weiner <hannes@cmpxchg.org>,
Michal Hocko <mhocko@kernel.org>,
Vladimir Davydov <vdavydov.dev@gmail.com>,
Muchun Song <muchun.song@linux.dev>,
Simon Horman <simon.horman@corigine.com>,
netdev@vger.kernel.org, linux-mm@kvack.org,
cgroups@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next v5 2/3] sock: Always take memcg pressure into consideration
Date: Sun, 4 Jun 2023 12:36:25 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <CAF=yD-LFQRreWq1RMkvLw9Nj3NQpJwbDSCfECUhh-aVchR-jsg@mail.gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20230602204159.vo7fmuvh3y2pdfi5@google.com>
On Fri, Jun 2, 2023 at 10:42 PM Shakeel Butt <shakeelb@google.com> wrote:
>
> On Fri, Jun 02, 2023 at 04:11:34PM +0800, Abel Wu wrote:
> > The sk_under_memory_pressure() is called to check whether there is
> > memory pressure related to this socket. But now it ignores the net-
> > memcg's pressure if the proto of the socket doesn't care about the
> > global pressure, which may put burden on its memcg compaction or
> > reclaim path (also remember that socket memory is un-reclaimable).
> >
> > So always check the memcg's vm status to alleviate memstalls when
> > it's in pressure.
> >
>
> This is interesting. UDP is the only protocol which supports memory
> accounting (i.e. udp_memory_allocated) but it does not define
> memory_pressure. In addition, it does have sysctl_udp_mem. So
> effectively UDP supports a hard limit and ignores memcg pressure at the
> moment. This patch will change its behavior to consider memcg pressure
> as well. I don't have any objection but let's get opinion of UDP
> maintainer.
Others have more experience with memory pressure on UDP, for the
record. Paolo worked on UDP memory pressure in
https://lore.kernel.org/netdev/cover.1579281705.git.pabeni@redhat.com/
It does seem odd to me to modify sk_under_memory_pressure only. See
for instance its use in __sk_mem_raise_allocated:
if (sk_has_memory_pressure(sk)) {
u64 alloc;
if (!sk_under_memory_pressure(sk))
return 1;
This is not even reached as sk_has_memory_pressure is false for UDP.
So this commit only affects the only other protocol-independent
caller, __sk_mem_reduce_allocated, to possibly call
sk_leave_memory_pressure if now under the global limit.
What is the expected behavioral change in practice of this commit?
> > Signed-off-by: Abel Wu <wuyun.abel@bytedance.com>
> > ---
> > include/net/sock.h | 6 ++----
> > 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)
> >
> > diff --git a/include/net/sock.h b/include/net/sock.h
> > index 3f63253ee092..ad1895ffbc4a 100644
> > --- a/include/net/sock.h
> > +++ b/include/net/sock.h
> > @@ -1411,13 +1411,11 @@ static inline bool sk_has_memory_pressure(const struct sock *sk)
> >
> > static inline bool sk_under_memory_pressure(const struct sock *sk)
> > {
> > - if (!sk->sk_prot->memory_pressure)
> > - return false;
> > -
> > if (mem_cgroup_under_socket_pressure(sk->sk_memcg))
> > return true;
> >
> > - return !!*sk->sk_prot->memory_pressure;
> > + return sk->sk_prot->memory_pressure &&
> > + *sk->sk_prot->memory_pressure;
> > }
> >
> > static inline long
> > --
> > 2.37.3
> >
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2023-06-04 10:37 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 14+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2023-06-02 8:11 [PATCH net-next v5 0/3] sock: Improve condition on sockmem pressure Abel Wu
2023-06-02 8:11 ` [PATCH net-next v5 1/3] net-memcg: Fold dependency into memcg pressure cond Abel Wu
2023-06-02 20:25 ` Shakeel Butt
2023-06-05 11:52 ` Abel Wu
2023-06-02 8:11 ` [PATCH net-next v5 2/3] sock: Always take memcg pressure into consideration Abel Wu
2023-06-02 20:41 ` Shakeel Butt
2023-06-04 10:36 ` Willem de Bruijn [this message]
2023-06-05 3:44 ` Abel Wu
2023-06-05 8:27 ` Paolo Abeni
2023-06-05 9:57 ` Abel Wu
2023-06-02 8:11 ` [PATCH net-next v5 3/3] sock: Fix misuse of sk_under_memory_pressure() Abel Wu
2023-06-02 20:53 ` Shakeel Butt
2023-06-05 8:34 ` Abel Wu
2023-06-06 8:39 ` kernel test robot
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='CAF=yD-LFQRreWq1RMkvLw9Nj3NQpJwbDSCfECUhh-aVchR-jsg@mail.gmail.com' \
--to=willemdebruijn.kernel@gmail.com \
--cc=cgroups@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=davem@davemloft.net \
--cc=edumazet@google.com \
--cc=hannes@cmpxchg.org \
--cc=kuba@kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
--cc=mhocko@kernel.org \
--cc=muchun.song@linux.dev \
--cc=netdev@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=pabeni@redhat.com \
--cc=shakeelb@google.com \
--cc=simon.horman@corigine.com \
--cc=vdavydov.dev@gmail.com \
--cc=wuyun.abel@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).