The soft limit has been traditionally initialized to RESOURCE_MAX
which means that the group is soft unlimited by default. This was
working more or less satisfactorily so far because the soft limit has
been interpreted as a tool to hint memory reclaim which groups to
reclaim first to free some memory so groups basically opted in for being
reclaimed more.
While this feature might be really helpful it would be even nicer if
the soft reclaim could be used as a certain working set protection -
only groups over their soft limit are reclaimed as far as the reclaim
is able to free memory. In order to accomplish this behavior we have to
reconsider the default soft limit value because with the current default
all groups would become soft unreclaimable and so the reclaim would have
to fall back to ignoring soft reclaim altogether harming those groups
that set up a limit as a protection against the reclaim. Changing the
default soft limit to 0 wouldn't work either because all groups would
become soft reclaimable as the parent's limit would overwrite all its
children down the hierarchy.
This patch doesn't change the default soft limit value. Rather than that
it distinguishes groups with the limit set by user by a per group flag.
All groups are considered soft reclaimable regardless their limit until
a limit is set. The default limit doesn't enforce reclaim down the
hierarchy.
TODO: How do we present default unlimited vs. RESOURCE_MAX set by the
user? One possible way could be returning -1 for RESOURCE_MAX && !soft_limited
but this is a change in user interface. Although nothing explicitly says
the value has to be greater > 0 I can imagine this could be PITA to use.
Signed-off-by: Michal Hocko <mhocko@xxxxxxx>
---
mm/memcontrol.c | 22 ++++++++++++++++++----
1 file changed, 18 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)
diff --git a/mm/memcontrol.c b/mm/memcontrol.c
index 33424d8..043d760 100644
--- a/mm/memcontrol.c
+++ b/mm/memcontrol.c
@@ -292,6 +292,10 @@ struct mem_cgroup {
* Should the accounting and control be hierarchical, per subtree?
*/
bool use_hierarchy;
+ /*
+ * Is the group soft limited?
+ */
+ bool soft_limited;
unsigned long kmem_account_flags; /* See KMEM_ACCOUNTED_*, below */
bool oom_lock;
@@ -2062,14 +2066,15 @@ static bool mem_cgroup_reclaimable(struct mem_cgroup *memcg, bool noswap)
/*
* A group is eligible for the soft limit reclaim if it is
- * a) is over its soft limit
- * b) any parent up the hierarchy is over its soft limit
+ * a) doesn't have any soft limit set
+ * b) is over its soft limit
+ * c) any parent up the hierarchy is over its soft limit
*/
bool mem_cgroup_soft_reclaim_eligible(struct mem_cgroup *memcg)
{
struct mem_cgroup *parent = memcg;
- if (res_counter_soft_limit_excess(&memcg->res))
+ if (!memcg->soft_limited || res_counter_soft_limit_excess(&memcg->res))
return true;
/*
@@ -2077,7 +2082,8 @@ bool mem_cgroup_soft_reclaim_eligible(struct mem_cgroup *memcg)
* have to obey and reclaim from this group as well.
*/
while((parent = parent_mem_cgroup(parent))) {
- if (res_counter_soft_limit_excess(&parent->res))
+ if (memcg->soft_limited &&
+ res_counter_soft_limit_excess(&parent->res))
return true;
}
@@ -5237,6 +5243,14 @@ static int mem_cgroup_write(struct cgroup *cont, struct cftype *cft,
ret = res_counter_set_soft_limit(&memcg->res, val);
else
ret = -EINVAL;
+
+ /*
+ * We could disable soft_limited when we get RESOURCE_MAX but
+ * then we have a little problem to distinguish the default
+ * unlimited and limitted but never soft reclaimed groups.
+ */
+ if (!ret)
+ memcg->soft_limited = true;
break;
default:
ret = -EINVAL; /* should be BUG() ? */
--
1.7.10.4
--
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>