memalloc_use_memcg() worked for kernel allocations but was silently
ignored for user pages.
This patch establishes a precedence order for who gets charged:
1. If there is a memcg associated with the page already, that memcg is
charged. This happens during swapin.
2. If an explicit mm is passed, mm->memcg is charged. This happens
during page faults, which can be triggered in remote VMs (eg gup).
3. Otherwise consult the current process context. If it has configured
a current->active_memcg, use that. Otherwise, current->mm->memcg.
Previously, if a NULL mm was passed to mem_cgroup_try_charge (case 3) it
would always charge the root cgroup. Now it looks up the current
active_memcg first (falling back to charging the root cgroup if not
set).
Signed-off-by: Dan Schatzberg <[email protected]>
Acked-by: Johannes Weiner <[email protected]>
Acked-by: Tejun Heo <[email protected]>
Acked-by: Chris Down <[email protected]>
Reviewed-by: Shakeel Butt <[email protected]>
---
mm/filemap.c | 2 +-
mm/memcontrol.c | 14 +++++++++++---
mm/shmem.c | 4 ++--
3 files changed, 14 insertions(+), 6 deletions(-)
diff --git a/mm/filemap.c b/mm/filemap.c
index 43700480d897..5135f330f05c 100644
--- a/mm/filemap.c
+++ b/mm/filemap.c
@@ -843,7 +843,7 @@ noinline int __add_to_page_cache_locked(struct page *page,
page->index = offset;
if (!huge) {
- error = mem_cgroup_charge(page, current->mm, gfp);
+ error = mem_cgroup_charge(page, NULL, gfp);
if (error)
goto error;
charged = true;
diff --git a/mm/memcontrol.c b/mm/memcontrol.c
index e064ac0d850a..9a1b23ed3412 100644
--- a/mm/memcontrol.c
+++ b/mm/memcontrol.c
@@ -6690,7 +6690,8 @@ void mem_cgroup_calculate_protection(struct mem_cgroup *root,
* @gfp_mask: reclaim mode
*
* Try to charge @page to the memcg that @mm belongs to, reclaiming
- * pages according to @gfp_mask if necessary.
+ * pages according to @gfp_mask if necessary. if @mm is NULL, try to
+ * charge to the active memcg.
*
* Returns 0 on success. Otherwise, an error code is returned.
*/
@@ -6726,8 +6727,15 @@ int mem_cgroup_charge(struct page *page, struct mm_struct *mm, gfp_t gfp_mask)
rcu_read_unlock();
}
- if (!memcg)
- memcg = get_mem_cgroup_from_mm(mm);
+ if (!memcg) {
+ if (!mm) {
+ memcg = get_mem_cgroup_from_current();
+ if (!memcg)
+ memcg = get_mem_cgroup_from_mm(current->mm);
+ } else {
+ memcg = get_mem_cgroup_from_mm(mm);
+ }
+ }
ret = try_charge(memcg, gfp_mask, nr_pages);
if (ret)
diff --git a/mm/shmem.c b/mm/shmem.c
index b2db4ed0fbc7..353b362c370e 100644
--- a/mm/shmem.c
+++ b/mm/shmem.c
@@ -1695,7 +1695,7 @@ static int shmem_swapin_page(struct inode *inode, pgoff_t index,
{
struct address_space *mapping = inode->i_mapping;
struct shmem_inode_info *info = SHMEM_I(inode);
- struct mm_struct *charge_mm = vma ? vma->vm_mm : current->mm;
+ struct mm_struct *charge_mm = vma ? vma->vm_mm : NULL;
struct page *page;
swp_entry_t swap;
int error;
@@ -1816,7 +1816,7 @@ static int shmem_getpage_gfp(struct inode *inode, pgoff_t index,
}
sbinfo = SHMEM_SB(inode->i_sb);
- charge_mm = vma ? vma->vm_mm : current->mm;
+ charge_mm = vma ? vma->vm_mm : NULL;
page = pagecache_get_page(mapping, index,
FGP_ENTRY | FGP_HEAD | FGP_LOCK, 0);
--
2.30.2
On Tue, Mar 16, 2021 at 8:37 AM Dan Schatzberg <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> memalloc_use_memcg() worked for kernel allocations but was silently
> ignored for user pages.
set_active_memcg()
>
> This patch establishes a precedence order for who gets charged:
>
> 1. If there is a memcg associated with the page already, that memcg is
> charged. This happens during swapin.
>
> 2. If an explicit mm is passed, mm->memcg is charged. This happens
> during page faults, which can be triggered in remote VMs (eg gup).
>
> 3. Otherwise consult the current process context. If it has configured
> a current->active_memcg, use that. Otherwise, current->mm->memcg.
It's a bit more sophisticated than current->active_memcg. It has been
extended to work in interrupt context as well.
>
> Previously, if a NULL mm was passed to mem_cgroup_try_charge (case 3) it
mem_cgroup_charge()
> would always charge the root cgroup. Now it looks up the current
> active_memcg first (falling back to charging the root cgroup if not
> set).
>
> Signed-off-by: Dan Schatzberg <[email protected]>
> Acked-by: Johannes Weiner <[email protected]>
> Acked-by: Tejun Heo <[email protected]>
> Acked-by: Chris Down <[email protected]>
> Reviewed-by: Shakeel Butt <[email protected]>
> ---
> mm/filemap.c | 2 +-
> mm/memcontrol.c | 14 +++++++++++---
> mm/shmem.c | 4 ++--
> 3 files changed, 14 insertions(+), 6 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/mm/filemap.c b/mm/filemap.c
> index 43700480d897..5135f330f05c 100644
> --- a/mm/filemap.c
> +++ b/mm/filemap.c
> @@ -843,7 +843,7 @@ noinline int __add_to_page_cache_locked(struct page *page,
> page->index = offset;
>
> if (!huge) {
> - error = mem_cgroup_charge(page, current->mm, gfp);
> + error = mem_cgroup_charge(page, NULL, gfp);
> if (error)
> goto error;
> charged = true;
> diff --git a/mm/memcontrol.c b/mm/memcontrol.c
> index e064ac0d850a..9a1b23ed3412 100644
> --- a/mm/memcontrol.c
> +++ b/mm/memcontrol.c
> @@ -6690,7 +6690,8 @@ void mem_cgroup_calculate_protection(struct mem_cgroup *root,
> * @gfp_mask: reclaim mode
> *
> * Try to charge @page to the memcg that @mm belongs to, reclaiming
> - * pages according to @gfp_mask if necessary.
> + * pages according to @gfp_mask if necessary. if @mm is NULL, try to
> + * charge to the active memcg.
> *
> * Returns 0 on success. Otherwise, an error code is returned.
> */
> @@ -6726,8 +6727,15 @@ int mem_cgroup_charge(struct page *page, struct mm_struct *mm, gfp_t gfp_mask)
> rcu_read_unlock();
> }
>
> - if (!memcg)
> - memcg = get_mem_cgroup_from_mm(mm);
> + if (!memcg) {
> + if (!mm) {
> + memcg = get_mem_cgroup_from_current();
> + if (!memcg)
> + memcg = get_mem_cgroup_from_mm(current->mm);
> + } else {
> + memcg = get_mem_cgroup_from_mm(mm);
> + }
> + }
You will need to rebase to the latest mm tree. This code has changed.
On Tue, Mar 16, 2021 at 08:50:16AM -0700, Shakeel Butt wrote:
> You will need to rebase to the latest mm tree. This code has changed.
Thanks for the feedback, I will address these comments in another
rebase. I'll wait and see if there's any comments concerning the
loop-related patches but it sounds like this will need to go through
the mm-tree