Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1752353Ab2KGHNW (ORCPT ); Wed, 7 Nov 2012 02:13:22 -0500 Received: from mx2.parallels.com ([64.131.90.16]:49722 "EHLO mx2.parallels.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1750910Ab2KGHNU (ORCPT ); Wed, 7 Nov 2012 02:13:20 -0500 Message-ID: <509A0A04.2030503@parallels.com> Date: Wed, 7 Nov 2012 08:13:08 +0100 From: Glauber Costa User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:16.0) Gecko/20121016 Thunderbird/16.0.1 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Andrew Morton CC: , , , Johannes Weiner , Tejun Heo , Michal Hocko , Christoph Lameter , Pekka Enberg , David Rientjes , Pekka Enberg , Suleiman Souhlal Subject: Re: [PATCH v6 25/29] memcg/sl[au]b: shrink dead caches References: <1351771665-11076-1-git-send-email-glommer@parallels.com> <1351771665-11076-26-git-send-email-glommer@parallels.com> <20121105164813.2eba5ecb.akpm@linux-foundation.org> In-Reply-To: <20121105164813.2eba5ecb.akpm@linux-foundation.org> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Originating-IP: [88.2.50.55] Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 2269 Lines: 47 On 11/06/2012 01:48 AM, Andrew Morton wrote: > On Thu, 1 Nov 2012 16:07:41 +0400 > Glauber Costa wrote: > >> This means that when we destroy a memcg cache that happened to be empty, >> those caches may take a lot of time to go away: removing the memcg >> reference won't destroy them - because there are pending references, and >> the empty pages will stay there, until a shrinker is called upon for any >> reason. >> >> In this patch, we will call kmem_cache_shrink for all dead caches that >> cannot be destroyed because of remaining pages. After shrinking, it is >> possible that it could be freed. If this is not the case, we'll schedule >> a lazy worker to keep trying. > > This patch is really quite nasty. We poll the cache once per minute > trying to shrink then free it? a) it gives rise to concerns that there > will be scenarios where the system could suffer unlimited memory windup > but mainly b) it's just lame. > > The kernel doesn't do this sort of thing. The kernel tries to be > precise: in a situation like this we keep track of the number of > outstanding objects and when that falls to zero, we free their > container synchronously. If those objects are normally left floating > around in an allocated but reclaimable state then we can address that > by synchronously freeing them if their container has been destroyed. > > Or something like that. If it's something else then fine, but not this. > > What do we need to do to fix this? > The original patch had a unlikely() test in the free path, conditional on whether or not the cache is dead, that would then call this is the cache would now be empty. I got several requests to remove it and change it to something like this, because that is a fast path (I myself think an unlikely branch is not that bad) If you think such a test is acceptable, I can bring it back and argue in the basis of "akpm made me do it!". But meanwhile I will give this extra though to see if there is any alternative way I can do it... -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/