On 22.01.2021 02:06, Yang Shi wrote:
> Currently the number of deferred objects are per shrinker, but some slabs, for example,
> vfs inode/dentry cache are per memcg, this would result in poor isolation among memcgs.
>
> The deferred objects typically are generated by __GFP_NOFS allocations, one memcg with
> excessive __GFP_NOFS allocations may blow up deferred objects, then other innocent memcgs
> may suffer from over shrink, excessive reclaim latency, etc.
>
> For example, two workloads run in memcgA and memcgB respectively, workload in B is vfs
> heavy workload. Workload in A generates excessive deferred objects, then B's vfs cache
> might be hit heavily (drop half of caches) by B's limit reclaim or global reclaim.
>
> We observed this hit in our production environment which was running vfs heavy workload
> shown as the below tracing log:
>
> <...>-409454 [016] .... 28286961.747146: mm_shrink_slab_start: super_cache_scan+0x0/0x1a0 ffff9a83046f3458:
> nid: 1 objects to shrink 3641681686040 gfp_flags GFP_HIGHUSER_MOVABLE|__GFP_ZERO pgs_scanned 1 lru_pgs 15721
> cache items 246404277 delta 31345 total_scan 123202138
> <...>-409454 [022] .... 28287105.928018: mm_shrink_slab_end: super_cache_scan+0x0/0x1a0 ffff9a83046f3458:
> nid: 1 unused scan count 3641681686040 new scan count 3641798379189 total_scan 602
> last shrinker return val 123186855
>
> The vfs cache and page cache ration was 10:1 on this machine, and half of caches were dropped.
> This also resulted in significant amount of page caches were dropped due to inodes eviction.
>
> Make nr_deferred per memcg for memcg aware shrinkers would solve the unfairness and bring
> better isolation.
>
> When memcg is not enabled (!CONFIG_MEMCG or memcg disabled), the shrinker's nr_deferred
> would be used. And non memcg aware shrinkers use shrinker's nr_deferred all the time.
>
> Signed-off-by: Yang Shi <shy828301@xxxxxxxxx>
> ---
> include/linux/memcontrol.h | 7 +++---
> mm/vmscan.c | 49 +++++++++++++++++++++++++-------------
> 2 files changed, 36 insertions(+), 20 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/include/linux/memcontrol.h b/include/linux/memcontrol.h
> index 62b888b88a5f..e0384367e07d 100644
> --- a/include/linux/memcontrol.h
> +++ b/include/linux/memcontrol.h
> @@ -93,12 +93,13 @@ struct lruvec_stat {
> };
>
> /*
> - * Bitmap of shrinker::id corresponding to memcg-aware shrinkers,
> - * which have elements charged to this memcg.
> + * Bitmap and deferred work of shrinker::id corresponding to memcg-aware
> + * shrinkers, which have elements charged to this memcg.
> */
> struct shrinker_info {
> struct rcu_head rcu;
> - unsigned long map[];
> + unsigned long *map;
> + atomic_long_t *nr_deferred;
> };
>
> /*
> diff --git a/mm/vmscan.c b/mm/vmscan.c
> index 018e1beb24c9..722aa71b13b2 100644
> --- a/mm/vmscan.c
> +++ b/mm/vmscan.c
> @@ -192,11 +192,13 @@ static void free_shrinker_info_rcu(struct rcu_head *head)
> kvfree(container_of(head, struct shrinker_info, rcu));
> }
>
> -static int expand_one_shrinker_info(struct mem_cgroup *memcg,
> - int size, int old_size)
> +static int expand_one_shrinker_info(struct mem_cgroup *memcg, int nr_max,
> + int m_size, int d_size,
> + int old_m_size, int old_d_size)
> {
> struct shrinker_info *new, *old;
> int nid;
> + int size = m_size + d_size;
>
> for_each_node(nid) {
> old = rcu_dereference_protected(
> @@ -209,9 +211,16 @@ static int expand_one_shrinker_info(struct mem_cgroup *memcg,
> if (!new)
> return -ENOMEM;
>
> - /* Set all old bits, clear all new bits */
> - memset(new->map, (int)0xff, old_size);
> - memset((void *)new->map + old_size, 0, size - old_size);
> + new->map = (unsigned long *)(new + 1);
> + new->nr_deferred = (atomic_long_t *)(new->map +
> + nr_max / BITS_PER_LONG + 1);
Why not
new->nr_deferred = (void *)new->map + m_size;
?
> +
> + /* map: set all old bits, clear all new bits */
> + memset(new->map, (int)0xff, old_m_size);
> + memset((void *)new->map + old_m_size, 0, m_size - old_m_size);
> + /* nr_deferred: copy old values, clear all new values */
> + memcpy(new->nr_deferred, old->nr_deferred, old_d_size);
> + memset((void *)new->nr_deferred + old_d_size, 0, d_size - old_d_size);
>
> rcu_assign_pointer(memcg->nodeinfo[nid]->shrinker_info, new);
> call_rcu(&old->rcu, free_shrinker_info_rcu);
> @@ -226,9 +235,6 @@ void free_shrinker_info(struct mem_cgroup *memcg)
> struct shrinker_info *info;
> int nid;
>
> - if (mem_cgroup_is_root(memcg))
> - return;
> -
> for_each_node(nid) {
> pn = mem_cgroup_nodeinfo(memcg, nid);
> info = rcu_dereference_protected(pn->shrinker_info, true);
> @@ -242,12 +248,13 @@ int alloc_shrinker_info(struct mem_cgroup *memcg)
> {
> struct shrinker_info *info;
> int nid, size, ret = 0;
> -
> - if (mem_cgroup_is_root(memcg))
> - return 0;
> + int m_size, d_size = 0;
>
> down_write(&shrinker_rwsem);
> - size = (shrinker_nr_max / BITS_PER_LONG + 1) * sizeof(unsigned long);
> + m_size = (shrinker_nr_max / BITS_PER_LONG + 1) * sizeof(unsigned long);
> + d_size = shrinker_nr_max * sizeof(atomic_long_t);
> + size = m_size + d_size;
> +
> for_each_node(nid) {
> info = kvzalloc_node(sizeof(*info) + size, GFP_KERNEL, nid);
> if (!info) {
> @@ -255,6 +262,9 @@ int alloc_shrinker_info(struct mem_cgroup *memcg)
> ret = -ENOMEM;
> break;
> }
> + info->map = (unsigned long *)(info + 1);
> + info->nr_deferred = (atomic_long_t *)(info->map +
> + shrinker_nr_max / BITS_PER_LONG + 1);
Why not:
info->nr_deferred = (void*)info->map + m_size;
?
> rcu_assign_pointer(memcg->nodeinfo[nid]->shrinker_info, info);
> }
> up_write(&shrinker_rwsem);
> @@ -266,10 +276,16 @@ static int expand_shrinker_info(int new_id)
> {
> int size, old_size, ret = 0;
> int new_nr_max = new_id + 1;
> + int m_size, d_size = 0;
> + int old_m_size, old_d_size = 0;
> struct mem_cgroup *memcg;
>
> - size = (new_nr_max / BITS_PER_LONG + 1) * sizeof(unsigned long);
> - old_size = (shrinker_nr_max / BITS_PER_LONG + 1) * sizeof(unsigned long);
> + m_size = (new_nr_max / BITS_PER_LONG + 1) * sizeof(unsigned long);
> + d_size = new_nr_max * sizeof(atomic_long_t);
> + size = m_size + d_size;
> + old_m_size = (shrinker_nr_max / BITS_PER_LONG + 1) * sizeof(unsigned long);
Could you please pack this twice repeating pattern into some macro? E.g.,
#define NR_MAX_TO_SHR_MAP_SIZE(nr_max) \
((nr_max / BITS_PER_LONG + 1) * sizeof(unsigned long))
> + old_d_size = shrinker_nr_max * sizeof(atomic_long_t);
> + old_size = old_m_size + old_d_size;
> if (size <= old_size)
> return 0;
>
> @@ -278,9 +294,8 @@ static int expand_shrinker_info(int new_id)
>
> memcg = mem_cgroup_iter(NULL, NULL, NULL);
> do {
> - if (mem_cgroup_is_root(memcg))
> - continue;
> - ret = expand_one_shrinker_info(memcg, size, old_size);
> + ret = expand_one_shrinker_info(memcg, new_nr_max, m_size, d_size,
> + old_m_size, old_d_size);
> if (ret) {
> mem_cgroup_iter_break(NULL, memcg);
> goto out;
>
