On Mon, May 23, 2011 at 5:11 PM, KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki
<kamezawa.hiroyu@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> On Mon, 23 May 2011 16:36:20 -0700
> Ying Han <yinghan@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
>> On Fri, May 20, 2011 at 4:56 PM, Hiroyuki Kamezawa
>> <kamezawa.hiroyuki@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>> > 2011/5/21 Andrew Morton <akpm@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>:
>> >> On Fri, 20 May 2011 12:46:36 +0900
>> >> KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki <kamezawa.hiroyu@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>> >>
>> >>> This patch adds a logic to keep usage margin to the limit in asynchronous way.
>> >>> When the usage over some threshould (determined automatically), asynchronous
>> >>> memory reclaim runs and shrink memory to limit - MEMCG_ASYNC_STOP_MARGIN.
>> >>>
>> >>> By this, there will be no difference in total amount of usage of cpu to
>> >>> scan the LRU
>> >>
>> >> This is not true if "don't writepage at all (revisit this when
>> >> dirty_ratio comes.)" is true. Skipping over dirty pages can cause
>> >> larger amounts of CPU consumption.
>> >>
>> >>> but we'll have a chance to make use of wait time of applications
>> >>> for freeing memory. For example, when an application read a file or socket,
>> >>> to fill the newly alloated memory, it needs wait. Async reclaim can make use
>> >>> of that time and give a chance to reduce latency by background works.
>> >>>
>> >>> This patch only includes required hooks to trigger async reclaim and user interfaces.
>> >>> Core logics will be in the following patches.
>> >>>
>> >>>
>> >>> ...
>> >>>
>> >>> /*
>> >>> + * For example, with transparent hugepages, memory reclaim scan at hitting
>> >>> + * limit can very long as to reclaim HPAGE_SIZE of memory. This increases
>> >>> + * latency of page fault and may cause fallback. At usual page allocation,
>> >>> + * we'll see some (shorter) latency, too. To reduce latency, it's appreciated
>> >>> + * to free memory in background to make margin to the limit. This consumes
>> >>> + * cpu but we'll have a chance to make use of wait time of applications
>> >>> + * (read disk etc..) by asynchronous reclaim.
>> >>> + *
>> >>> + * This async reclaim tries to reclaim HPAGE_SIZE * 2 of pages when margin
>> >>> + * to the limit is smaller than HPAGE_SIZE * 2. This will be enabled
>> >>> + * automatically when the limit is set and it's greater than the threshold.
>> >>> + */
>> >>> +#if HPAGE_SIZE != PAGE_SIZE
>> >>> +#define MEMCG_ASYNC_LIMIT_THRESH (HPAGE_SIZE * 64)
>> >>> +#define MEMCG_ASYNC_MARGIN (HPAGE_SIZE * 4)
>> >>> +#else /* make the margin as 4M bytes */
>> >>> +#define MEMCG_ASYNC_LIMIT_THRESH (128 * 1024 * 1024)
>> >>> +#define MEMCG_ASYNC_MARGIN (8 * 1024 * 1024)
>> >>> +#endif
>> >>
>> >> Document them, please. How are they used, what are their units.
>> >>
>> >
>> > will do.
>> >
>> >
>> >>> +static void mem_cgroup_may_async_reclaim(struct mem_cgroup *mem);
>> >>> +
>> >>> +/*
>> >>> * The memory controller data structure. The memory controller controls both
>> >>> * page cache and RSS per cgroup. We would eventually like to provide
>> >>> * statistics based on the statistics developed by Rik Van Riel for clock-pro,
>> >>> @@ -278,6 +303,12 @@ struct mem_cgroup {
>> >>> */
>> >>> unsigned long move_charge_at_immigrate;
>> >>> /*
>> >>> + * Checks for async reclaim.
>> >>> + */
>> >>> + unsigned long async_flags;
>> >>> +#define AUTO_ASYNC_ENABLED (0)
>> >>> +#define USE_AUTO_ASYNC (1)
>> >>
>> >> These are really confusing. I looked at the implementation and at the
>> >> documentation file and I'm still scratching my head. I can't work out
>> >> why they exist. With the amount of effort I put into it ;)
>> >>
>> >> Also, AUTO_ASYNC_ENABLED and USE_AUTO_ASYNC have practically the same
>> >> meaning, which doesn't help things.
>> >>
>> > Ah, yes it's confusing.
>>
>> Sorry I was confused by the memory.async_control interface. I assume
>> that is the knob to turn on/off the bg reclaim on per-memcg basis. But
>> when I tried to turn it off, it seems not working well:
>>
>> $ cat /proc/7248/cgroup
>> 3:memory:/A
>>
>> $ cat /dev/cgroup/memory/A/memory.async_control
>> 0
>>
>
> If enabled and kworker runs, this shows "3", for now.
> I'll make this simpler in the next post.
>
>> Then i can see the kworkers start running when the memcg A under
>> memory pressure. There was no other memcgs configured under root.
>
>
> What kworkers ? For example, many kworkers runs on ext4? on my host.
> If kworker/u:x works, it may be for memcg (for my host)
I am kind of sure they are kworkers from memcg. They start running
right after my test and then stop when i kill that test.
$ cat /dev/cgroup/memory/A/memory.limit_in_bytes
2147483648
$ cat /dev/cgroup/memory/A/memory.async_control
0
PID USER PR NI VIRT RES SHR S %CPU %MEM TIME+ COMMAND
393 root 20 0 0 0 0 S 54 0.0 1:30.36
kworker/7:1
391 root 20 0 0 0 0 S 51 0.0 1:42.35
kworker/5:1
390 root 20 0 0 0 0 S 43 0.0 1:45.55
kworker/4:1
11 root 20 0 0 0 0 S 40 0.0 1:36.98
kworker/1:0
14 root 20 0 0 0 0 S 36 0.0 1:47.04
kworker/0:1
389 root 20 0 0 0 0 S 24 0.0 0:47.35
kworker/3:1
20071 root 20 0 20.0g 497m 497m D 12 1.5 0:04.99 memtoy
392 root 20 0 0 0 0 S 10 0.0 1:26.43
kworker/6:1
--Ying
>
> Ok, I'll add statistics in v3.
>
> Thanks,
> -Kame
>
>
--
To unsubscribe, send a message with 'unsubscribe linux-mm' in
the body to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxx For more info on Linux MM,
see: http://www.linux-mm.org/ .
Fight unfair telecom internet charges in Canada: sign http://stopthemeter.ca/
Don't email: <a href