On Sat, Nov 07, 2015 at 05:53:38PM +0100, Jesper Dangaard Brouer wrote:
> On Thu, 5 Nov 2015 19:25:14 +0300
> Vladimir Davydov <vdavydov@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> > On Thu, Nov 05, 2015 at 04:38:06PM +0100, Jesper Dangaard Brouer wrote:
> > > Initial implementation missed support for kmem cgroup support
> > > in kmem_cache_free_bulk() call, add this.
> > >
> > > If CONFIG_MEMCG_KMEM is not enabled, the compiler should
> > > be smart enough to not add any asm code.
> > >
> > > Signed-off-by: Jesper Dangaard Brouer <brouer@xxxxxxxxxx>
> > >
> > > ---
> > > V2: Fixes according to input from:
> > > Vladimir Davydov <vdavydov@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> > > and Joonsoo Kim <iamjoonsoo.kim@xxxxxxx>
> > >
> > > mm/slub.c | 3 +++
> > > 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+)
> > >
> > > diff --git a/mm/slub.c b/mm/slub.c
> > > index 8e9e9b2ee6f3..bc64514ad1bb 100644
> > > --- a/mm/slub.c
> > > +++ b/mm/slub.c
> > > @@ -2890,6 +2890,9 @@ void kmem_cache_free_bulk(struct kmem_cache *s, size_t size, void **p)
> > > do {
> > > struct detached_freelist df;
> > >
> > > + /* Support for memcg */
> > > + s = cache_from_obj(s, p[size - 1]);
> > > +
> >
> > AFAIU all objects in the array should come from the same cache (should
> > they?), so it should be enough to call this only once:
>
> Can we be sure all objects in the array come from same cache?
>
> Imagine my use case:
> 1. application send packet alloc a SKB (from a slab)
> 2. packet TX to NIC via DMA
> 3. TX DMA completion cleans up 256 packets and kmem free SKBs
>
> I don't know enough about mem cgroups... but I can imagine two
> applications belonging to different mem-cgroups sending packet out same
> NIC and later getting their SKB (pkt-metadata struct) free'ed during
> the same TX completion (TX softirq) cycle, as a bulk free.
Hmm, I thought that a bunch of objects allocated using
kmem_cache_alloc_bulk must be freed using kmem_cache_free_bulk. If it
does not hold, i.e. if one can allocate an array of objects one by one
using kmem_cache_alloc and then batch-free them using
kmem_cache_free_bulk, then my proposal is irrelevant.
>
> With my limited mem cgroups, it looks like memcg works on the slab-page
> level?
Yes, a memcg has its private copy of each global kmem cache it attempted
to use, which implies that all objects on the same slab-page must belong
to the same memcg.
> And what I'm doing in this code is to group object together
> belonging to the same slab-page.
Yeah, after inspecting build_detached_freelist more closely, I see your
patch is correct. Feel free to add
Reviewed-by: Vladimir Davydov <vdavydov@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Thanks,
Vladimir
--
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>