Re: [PATCH RFC] mm/memcontrol: reclaim severe usage over high limit in get_user_pages loop

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 





On 02.08.2019 12:40, Michal Hocko wrote:
On Mon 29-07-19 20:55:09, Michal Hocko wrote:
On Mon 29-07-19 11:49:52, Johannes Weiner wrote:
On Sun, Jul 28, 2019 at 03:29:38PM +0300, Konstantin Khlebnikov wrote:
--- a/mm/gup.c
+++ b/mm/gup.c
@@ -847,8 +847,11 @@ static long __get_user_pages(struct task_struct *tsk, struct mm_struct *mm,
  			ret = -ERESTARTSYS;
  			goto out;
  		}
-		cond_resched();
+ /* Reclaim memory over high limit before stocking too much */
+		mem_cgroup_handle_over_high(true);

I'd rather this remained part of the try_charge() call. The code
comment in try_charge says this:

	 * We can perform reclaim here if __GFP_RECLAIM but let's
	 * always punt for simplicity and so that GFP_KERNEL can
	 * consistently be used during reclaim.

The simplicity argument doesn't hold true anymore once we have to add
manual calls into allocation sites. We should instead fix try_charge()
to do synchronous reclaim for __GFP_RECLAIM and only punt to userspace
return when actually needed.

Agreed. If we want to do direct reclaim on the high limit breach then it
should go into try_charge same way we do hard limit reclaim there. I am
not yet sure about how/whether to scale the excess. The only reason to
move reclaim to return-to-userspace path was GFP_NOWAIT charges. As you
say, maybe we should start by always performing the reclaim for
sleepable contexts first and only defer for non-sleeping requests.

In other words. Something like patch below (completely untested). Could
you give it a try Konstantin?

This should work but also eliminate all benefits from deferred reclaim:
bigger batching and running without of any locks.

After that gap between high and max will work just as reserve for atomic allocations.


diff --git a/mm/memcontrol.c b/mm/memcontrol.c
index ba9138a4a1de..53a35c526e43 100644
--- a/mm/memcontrol.c
+++ b/mm/memcontrol.c
@@ -2429,8 +2429,12 @@ static int try_charge(struct mem_cgroup *memcg, gfp_t gfp_mask,
  				schedule_work(&memcg->high_work);
  				break;
  			}
-			current->memcg_nr_pages_over_high += batch;
-			set_notify_resume(current);
+			if (gfpflags_allow_blocking(gfp_mask)) {
+				reclaim_high(memcg, nr_pages, GFP_KERNEL);
+			} else {
+				current->memcg_nr_pages_over_high += batch;
+				set_notify_resume(current);
+			}
  			break;
  		}
  	} while ((memcg = parent_mem_cgroup(memcg)));





[Index of Archives]     [Linux ARM Kernel]     [Linux ARM]     [Linux Omap]     [Fedora ARM]     [IETF Annouce]     [Bugtraq]     [Linux OMAP]     [Linux MIPS]     [eCos]     [Asterisk Internet PBX]     [Linux API]

  Powered by Linux