Re: [PATCH 5/7] shrink support for memcg kmem controller

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

 



On 02/22/2012 05:42 AM, KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki wrote:
On Tue, 21 Feb 2012 15:34:37 +0400
Glauber Costa<glommer@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>  wrote:

This patch adds the shrinker interface to memcg proposed kmem
controller. With this, softlimits starts being meaningful. I didn't
played to much with softlimits itself, since it is a bit in progress
for the general case as well. But this patch at least makes vmscan.c
no longer skip shrink_slab for the memcg case.

It also allows us to set the hard limit to a lower value than
current usage, as it is possible for the current memcg: a reclaim
is carried on, and if we succeed in freeing enough of kernel memory,
we can lower the limit.

Signed-off-by: Glauber Costa<glommer@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
CC: Kirill A. Shutemov<kirill@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
CC: Greg Thelen<gthelen@xxxxxxxxxx>
CC: Johannes Weiner<jweiner@xxxxxxxxxx>
CC: Michal Hocko<mhocko@xxxxxxx>
CC: Hiroyouki Kamezawa<kamezawa.hiroyu@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
CC: Paul Turner<pjt@xxxxxxxxxx>
CC: Frederic Weisbecker<fweisbec@xxxxxxxxx>
CC: Pekka Enberg<penberg@xxxxxxxxxx>
CC: Christoph Lameter<cl@xxxxxxxxx>
---
  include/linux/memcontrol.h |    5 +++
  include/linux/shrinker.h   |    4 ++
  mm/memcontrol.c            |   87 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++--
  mm/vmscan.c                |   60 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++--
  4 files changed, 150 insertions(+), 6 deletions(-)

diff --git a/include/linux/memcontrol.h b/include/linux/memcontrol.h
index 6138d10..246b2d4 100644
--- a/include/linux/memcontrol.h
+++ b/include/linux/memcontrol.h
@@ -33,12 +33,16 @@ struct mm_struct;
  struct memcg_kmem_cache {
  	struct kmem_cache *cache;
  	struct work_struct destroy;
+	struct list_head lru;
+	u32 nr_objects;
  	struct mem_cgroup *memcg; /* Should be able to do without this */
  };

  struct memcg_cache_struct {
  	int index;
  	struct kmem_cache *cache;
+	int (*shrink_fn)(struct shrinker *shrink, struct shrink_control *sc);
+	struct shrinker shrink;
  };

  enum memcg_cache_indexes {
@@ -53,6 +57,7 @@ struct mem_cgroup *memcg_from_shrinker(struct shrinker *s);
  struct memcg_kmem_cache *memcg_cache_get(struct mem_cgroup *memcg, int index);
  void register_memcg_cache(struct memcg_cache_struct *cache);
  void memcg_slab_destroy(struct kmem_cache *cache, struct mem_cgroup *memcg);
+bool memcg_slab_reclaim(struct mem_cgroup *memcg);

  struct kmem_cache *
  kmem_cache_dup(struct mem_cgroup *memcg, struct kmem_cache *base);
diff --git a/include/linux/shrinker.h b/include/linux/shrinker.h
index 07ceb97..11efdba 100644
--- a/include/linux/shrinker.h
+++ b/include/linux/shrinker.h
@@ -1,6 +1,7 @@
  #ifndef _LINUX_SHRINKER_H
  #define _LINUX_SHRINKER_H

+struct mem_cgroup;
  /*
   * This struct is used to pass information from page reclaim to the shrinkers.
   * We consolidate the values for easier extention later.
@@ -10,6 +11,7 @@ struct shrink_control {

  	/* How many slab objects shrinker() should scan and try to reclaim */
  	unsigned long nr_to_scan;
+	struct mem_cgroup *memcg;
  };

  /*
@@ -40,4 +42,6 @@ struct shrinker {
  #define DEFAULT_SEEKS 2 /* A good number if you don't know better. */
  extern void register_shrinker(struct shrinker *);
  extern void unregister_shrinker(struct shrinker *);
+
+extern void register_shrinker_memcg(struct shrinker *);
  #endif
diff --git a/mm/memcontrol.c b/mm/memcontrol.c
index 1b1db88..9c89a3c 100644
--- a/mm/memcontrol.c
+++ b/mm/memcontrol.c
@@ -3460,6 +3460,54 @@ static int mem_cgroup_resize_limit(struct mem_cgroup *memcg,
  	return ret;
  }

+static int mem_cgroup_resize_kmem_limit(struct mem_cgroup *memcg,
+					unsigned long long val)
+{
+
+	int retry_count;
+	int ret = 0;
+	int children = mem_cgroup_count_children(memcg);
+	u64 curusage, oldusage;
+
+	struct shrink_control shrink = {
+		.gfp_mask = GFP_KERNEL,
+		.memcg = memcg,
+	};
+
+	/*
+	 * For keeping hierarchical_reclaim simple, how long we should retry
+	 * is depends on callers. We set our retry-count to be function
+	 * of # of children which we should visit in this loop.
+	 */
+	retry_count = MEM_CGROUP_RECLAIM_RETRIES * children;
+
+	oldusage = res_counter_read_u64(&memcg->kmem, RES_USAGE);
+
+	while (retry_count) {
+		if (signal_pending(current)) {
+			ret = -EINTR;
+			break;
+		}
+		mutex_lock(&set_limit_mutex);
+		ret = res_counter_set_limit(&memcg->kmem, val);
+		mutex_unlock(&set_limit_mutex);
+		if (!ret)
+			break;
+
+		shrink_slab(&shrink, 0, 0);
+
+		curusage = res_counter_read_u64(&memcg->kmem, RES_USAGE);
+
+		/* Usage is reduced ? */
+		if (curusage>= oldusage)
+			retry_count--;
+		else
+			oldusage = curusage;
+	}
+	return ret;
+
+}
+
  static int mem_cgroup_resize_memsw_limit(struct mem_cgroup *memcg,
  					unsigned long long val)
  {
@@ -3895,13 +3943,17 @@ static int mem_cgroup_write(struct cgroup *cont, struct cftype *cft,
  			break;
  		if (type == _MEM)
  			ret = mem_cgroup_resize_limit(memcg, val);
+#ifdef CONFIG_CGROUP_MEM_RES_CTLR_KMEM
  		else if (type == _KMEM) {
  			if (!memcg->kmem_independent_accounting) {
  				ret = -EINVAL;
  				break;
  			}
-			ret = res_counter_set_limit(&memcg->kmem, val);
-		} else
+
+			ret = mem_cgroup_resize_kmem_limit(memcg, val);
+		}
+#endif
+		else
  			ret = mem_cgroup_resize_memsw_limit(memcg, val);
  		break;
  	case RES_SOFT_LIMIT:
@@ -5007,9 +5059,19 @@ struct memcg_kmem_cache *memcg_cache_get(struct mem_cgroup *memcg, int index)

  void register_memcg_cache(struct memcg_cache_struct *cache)
  {
+	struct shrinker *shrink;
+
  	BUG_ON(kmem_avail_caches[cache->index]);

  	kmem_avail_caches[cache->index] = cache;
+	if (!kmem_avail_caches[cache->index]->shrink_fn)
+		return;
+
+	shrink =&kmem_avail_caches[cache->index]->shrink;
+	shrink->seeks = DEFAULT_SEEKS;
+	shrink->shrink = kmem_avail_caches[cache->index]->shrink_fn;
+	shrink->batch = 1024;
+	register_shrinker_memcg(shrink);
  }

  #define memcg_kmem(memcg) \
@@ -5055,8 +5117,21 @@ int memcg_kmem_newpage(struct mem_cgroup *memcg, struct page *page, unsigned lon
  {
  	unsigned long size = pages<<  PAGE_SHIFT;
  	struct res_counter *fail;
+	int ret;
+	bool do_softlimit;
+
+	ret = res_counter_charge(memcg_kmem(memcg), size,&fail);
+	if (unlikely(mem_cgroup_event_ratelimit(memcg,
+						MEM_CGROUP_TARGET_THRESH))) {
+
+		do_softlimit = mem_cgroup_event_ratelimit(memcg,
+						MEM_CGROUP_TARGET_SOFTLIMIT);
+		mem_cgroup_threshold(memcg);
+		if (unlikely(do_softlimit))
+			mem_cgroup_update_tree(memcg, page);
+	}

Do we need to have this hook here ?
(BTW, please don't duplicate...)



-	return res_counter_charge(memcg_kmem(memcg), size,&fail);
+	return ret;
  }

  void memcg_kmem_freepage(struct mem_cgroup *memcg, struct page *page, unsigned long pages)
@@ -5083,6 +5158,7 @@ void memcg_create_kmem_caches(struct mem_cgroup *memcg)
  		else
  			memcg->kmem_cache[i].cache = kmem_cache_dup(memcg, cache);
  		INIT_WORK(&memcg->kmem_cache[i].destroy, memcg_cache_destroy);
+		INIT_LIST_HEAD(&memcg->kmem_cache[i].lru);
  		memcg->kmem_cache[i].memcg = memcg;
  	}
  }
@@ -5157,6 +5233,11 @@ free_out:
  	return ERR_PTR(error);
  }

+bool memcg_slab_reclaim(struct mem_cgroup *memcg)
+{
+	return !memcg->kmem_independent_accounting;
+}
+
  void memcg_slab_destroy(struct kmem_cache *cache, struct mem_cgroup *memcg)
  {
  	int i;
diff --git a/mm/vmscan.c b/mm/vmscan.c
index c52b235..b9bceb6 100644
--- a/mm/vmscan.c
+++ b/mm/vmscan.c
@@ -159,6 +159,23 @@ long vm_total_pages;	/* The total number of pages which the VM controls */
  static LIST_HEAD(shrinker_list);
  static DECLARE_RWSEM(shrinker_rwsem);

+#ifdef CONFIG_CGROUP_MEM_RES_CTLR_KMEM
+/*
+ * If we could guarantee the root mem cgroup will always exist, we could just
+ * use the normal shrinker_list, and assume that the root memcg is passed
+ * as a parameter. But we're not quite there yet. Because of that, the shinkers
+ * from the memcg case can be different from the normal shrinker for the same
+ * object. This is not the ideal situation but is a step towards that.
+ *
+ * Also, not all caches will have their memcg version (also likely to change),
+ * so scanning the whole list is a waste.
+ *
+ * I am using, however, the same lock for both lists. Updates to it should
+ * be unfrequent, so I don't expect that to generate contention
+ */
+static LIST_HEAD(shrinker_memcg_list);
+#endif
+
  #ifdef CONFIG_CGROUP_MEM_RES_CTLR
  static bool global_reclaim(struct scan_control *sc)
  {
@@ -169,6 +186,11 @@ static bool scanning_global_lru(struct mem_cgroup_zone *mz)
  {
  	return !mz->mem_cgroup;
  }
+
+static bool global_slab_reclaim(struct scan_control *sc)
+{
+	return !memcg_slab_reclaim(sc->target_mem_cgroup);
+}

Do we need this new function ? global_reclaim() isn't enough ?

When we're tracking kmem separately, yes, because the softlimit happens on a different counter.

However, I'll try to merge it somehow with the normal code in the next run, and I'll keep this in mind. Let's see how it ends up...

--
To unsubscribe, send a message with 'unsubscribe linux-mm' in
the body to majordomo@xxxxxxxxx.  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=mailto:"dont@xxxxxxxxx";> email@xxxxxxxxx </a>


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