On Sun, Jun 24, 2012 at 06:08:26PM +0800, Wanpeng Li wrote:
> On Sun, Jun 24, 2012 at 11:46:14AM +0200, Johannes Weiner wrote:
> >On Sun, Jun 24, 2012 at 10:16:09AM +0800, Wanpeng Li wrote:
> >> From: Wanpeng Li <liwp@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> >>
> >> Since exceeded unused cached charges would add pressure to
> >> mem_cgroup_do_charge, more overhead would burn cpu cycles when
> >> mem_cgroup_do_charge cause page reclaim or even OOM be triggered
> >> just for such exceeded unused cached charges. Add MAX_CHARGE_BATCH
> >> to limit max cached charges.
> >>
> >> Signed-off-by: Wanpeng Li <liwp.linux@xxxxxxxxx>
> >> ---
> >> mm/memcontrol.c | 16 ++++++++++++++++
> >> 1 file changed, 16 insertions(+)
> >>
> >> diff --git a/mm/memcontrol.c b/mm/memcontrol.c
> >> index 0e092eb..1ff317a 100644
> >> --- a/mm/memcontrol.c
> >> +++ b/mm/memcontrol.c
> >> @@ -1954,6 +1954,14 @@ void mem_cgroup_update_page_stat(struct page *page,
> >> * TODO: maybe necessary to use big numbers in big irons.
> >> */
> >> #define CHARGE_BATCH 32U
> >> +
> >> +/*
> >> + * Max size of charge stock. Since exceeded unused cached charges would
> >> + * add pressure to mem_cgroup_do_charge which will cause page reclaim or
> >> + * even oom be triggered.
> >> + */
> >> +#define MAX_CHARGE_BATCH 1024U
> >> +
> >> struct memcg_stock_pcp {
> >> struct mem_cgroup *cached; /* this never be root cgroup */
> >> unsigned int nr_pages;
> >> @@ -2250,6 +2258,7 @@ static int __mem_cgroup_try_charge(struct mm_struct *mm,
> >> unsigned int batch = max(CHARGE_BATCH, nr_pages);
> >> int nr_oom_retries = MEM_CGROUP_RECLAIM_RETRIES;
> >> struct mem_cgroup *memcg = NULL;
> >> + struct memcg_stock_pcp *stock;
> >> int ret;
> >>
> >> /*
> >> @@ -2320,6 +2329,13 @@ again:
> >> rcu_read_unlock();
> >> }
> >>
> >> + stock = &get_cpu_var(memcg_stock);
> >> + if (memcg == stock->cached && stock->nr_pages) {
> >> + if (stock->nr_pages > MAX_CHARGE_BATCH)
> >> + batch = nr_pages;
> >> + }
> >> + put_cpu_var(memcg_stock);
> >
> >The only way excessive stock can build up is if the charging task gets
> >rescheduled, after trying to consume stock a few lines above, to a cpu
> >it was running on when it built up stock in the past.
> >
> > consume_stock()
> > memcg != stock->cached:
> > return false
> > do_charge()
> > <reschedule>
> > refill_stock()
> > memcg == stock->cached:
> > stock->nr_pages += nr_pages
>
> __mem_cgroup_try_charge() {
> unsigned int batch = max(CHARGE_BATCH, nr_pages);
> [...]
> mem_cgroup_do_charge(memcg, gfp_mask, batch, oom_check);
> [...]
> if(batch > nr_pages)
> refill_stock(memcg, batch - nr_pages);
> }
>
> Consider this scenario, If one task wants to charge nr_pages = 1,
> then batch = max(32,1) = 32, this time 31 excess charges
> will be charged in mem_cgroup_do_charge and then add to stock by
> refill_stock. Generally there are many tasks in one memory cgroup and
> maybe charges frequency. In this situation, limit will reach soon,
> and cause mem_cgroup_reclaim to call try_to_free_mem_cgroup_pages.
But the stock is not a black hole that gets built up for giggles! The
next time the processes want to charge a page on this cpu, they will
consume it from the stock. Not add more pages to it. Look at where
consume_stock() is called.
--
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/ .
Don't email: <a href=mailto:"dont@xxxxxxxxx";> email@xxxxxxxxx </a>