Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1753790AbbLODXI (ORCPT ); Mon, 14 Dec 2015 22:23:08 -0500 Received: from mgwkm02.jp.fujitsu.com ([202.219.69.169]:63202 "EHLO mgwkm02.jp.fujitsu.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1752287AbbLODXG (ORCPT ); Mon, 14 Dec 2015 22:23:06 -0500 X-SecurityPolicyCheck: OK by SHieldMailChecker v2.3.2 X-SHieldMailCheckerPolicyVersion: FJ-ISEC-20150223 X-SHieldMailCheckerMailID: 22c79ca1fb74470cb604c71a904df10d Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/7] mm: memcontrol: charge swap to cgroup2 To: Vladimir Davydov , Michal Hocko References: <265d8fe623ed2773d69a26d302eb31e335377c77.1449742560.git.vdavydov@virtuozzo.com> <20151214153037.GB4339@dhcp22.suse.cz> <20151214194258.GH28521@esperanza> Cc: Andrew Morton , Johannes Weiner , linux-mm@kvack.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org From: Kamezawa Hiroyuki Message-ID: <566F8781.80108@jp.fujitsu.com> Date: Tue, 15 Dec 2015 12:22:41 +0900 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.3; WOW64; rv:38.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/38.4.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <20151214194258.GH28521@esperanza> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-TM-AS-MML: disable Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 3136 Lines: 71 On 2015/12/15 4:42, Vladimir Davydov wrote: > On Mon, Dec 14, 2015 at 04:30:37PM +0100, Michal Hocko wrote: >> On Thu 10-12-15 14:39:14, Vladimir Davydov wrote: >>> In the legacy hierarchy we charge memsw, which is dubious, because: >>> >>> - memsw.limit must be >= memory.limit, so it is impossible to limit >>> swap usage less than memory usage. Taking into account the fact that >>> the primary limiting mechanism in the unified hierarchy is >>> memory.high while memory.limit is either left unset or set to a very >>> large value, moving memsw.limit knob to the unified hierarchy would >>> effectively make it impossible to limit swap usage according to the >>> user preference. >>> >>> - memsw.usage != memory.usage + swap.usage, because a page occupying >>> both swap entry and a swap cache page is charged only once to memsw >>> counter. As a result, it is possible to effectively eat up to >>> memory.limit of memory pages *and* memsw.limit of swap entries, which >>> looks unexpected. >>> >>> That said, we should provide a different swap limiting mechanism for >>> cgroup2. >>> This patch adds mem_cgroup->swap counter, which charges the actual >>> number of swap entries used by a cgroup. It is only charged in the >>> unified hierarchy, while the legacy hierarchy memsw logic is left >>> intact. >> >> I agree that the previous semantic was awkward. The problem I can see >> with this approach is that once the swap limit is reached the anon >> memory pressure might spill over to other and unrelated memcgs during >> the global memory pressure. I guess this is what Kame referred to as >> anon would become mlocked basically. This would be even more of an issue >> with resource delegation to sub-hierarchies because nobody will prevent >> setting the swap amount to a small value and use that as an anon memory >> protection. > > AFAICS such anon memory protection has a side-effect: real-life > workloads need page cache to run smoothly (at least for mapping > executables). Disabling swapping would switch pressure to page caches, > resulting in performance degradation. So, I don't think per memcg swap > limit can be abused to boost your workload on an overcommitted system. > > If you mean malicious users, well, they already have plenty ways to eat > all available memory up to the hard limit by creating unreclaimable > kernel objects. > "protect anon" user's malicious degree is far lower than such cracker like users. > Anyway, if you don't trust a container you'd better set the hard memory > limit so that it can't hurt others no matter what it runs and how it > tweaks its sub-tree knobs. > Limiting swap can easily cause "OOM-Killer even while there are available swap" with easy mistake. Can't you add "swap excess" switch to sysctl to allow global memory reclaim can ignore swap limitation ? Regards, -Kame -- 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/