Received: by 10.213.65.68 with SMTP id h4csp1081071imn; Thu, 22 Mar 2018 14:57:13 -0700 (PDT) X-Google-Smtp-Source: AG47ELthFqfmHR62p9ykf66KToBXUT54XMkzz9CZaYz7KI0VJ0Y+Qink8UWErZimSIwPgLGXXbVg X-Received: by 2002:a17:902:9694:: with SMTP id n20-v6mr671493plp.397.1521755833790; Thu, 22 Mar 2018 14:57:13 -0700 (PDT) ARC-Seal: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; t=1521755833; cv=none; d=google.com; s=arc-20160816; b=VH/oWLztyA+ijoA8mlQrGpAxz87ci0L8pzOps4jkJ/EYmLZdbN19aWkrDUVAPjKbU0 g5utalphHkAf8L3xKpbZezyX7dR+KqcO42LhWBBiGCMjZytiGwXCo7AfL4MdfDoA9rT8 rYTs8qgNZ9riZiYo5uXSc4A28ntA/H9uh9+kI8KKuQtzQM2w8K0MxgDkyCL55UR+bXkW NG3PjLaw3NiYjsVvCviMyQR+8wmriRJNLd+WNLGNDoMyqBppQzvTICt7blXfIdXACWeF ojkk1AWwUc0f7ODay3COq847hAyRPkpg367iVORKLKSpdP+m0mUcEem+pbjwQYou9Uwc aIHA== ARC-Message-Signature: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=google.com; s=arc-20160816; h=list-id:precedence:sender:mime-version:user-agent:references :message-id:in-reply-to:subject:cc:to:from:date:dkim-signature :arc-authentication-results; bh=Yt4qF+COneS3xHSXrMI+c6cfRvn1q0aHCp9OmB/dhBo=; b=hZQRfWMCGesLxao2WvkZyV7q6nDsZf0MeOzMqVFuy/W+qSPUEvjGTYSXmq4hSglqfU 69y5E+DDYb8E0QUVJT//YX0CCptFVRj+9ImCoamWdHVtndInPCDYhI7toyfMxvPb+6X9 qitNso83aPtfjsEj82YneuElSwoxTgo7UaWePc2DbqwRso6AMz6K6RflXUt7n3xt1Dr8 R51p5plBNUR27rmlV1CqYn+jg1U+fJs2VAHpsMzzMwlULxvA3uw8EAzNQy6LWlWxh/YU 893S+XMsF/qCgBjulYC/cyUerzC+/cMrANZc8m2IyQYdaG1tItAhSbe6M7HE1+VSq9c9 bDEQ== ARC-Authentication-Results: i=1; mx.google.com; dkim=pass header.i=@google.com header.s=20161025 header.b=AqR92HRq; spf=pass (google.com: best guess record for domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 209.132.180.67 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=REJECT sp=REJECT dis=NONE) header.from=google.com Return-Path: Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org. [209.132.180.67]) by mx.google.com with ESMTP id d8-v6si6476351pli.123.2018.03.22.14.56.59; Thu, 22 Mar 2018 14:57:13 -0700 (PDT) Received-SPF: pass (google.com: best guess record for domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 209.132.180.67 as permitted sender) client-ip=209.132.180.67; Authentication-Results: mx.google.com; dkim=pass header.i=@google.com header.s=20161025 header.b=AqR92HRq; spf=pass (google.com: best guess record for domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 209.132.180.67 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=REJECT sp=REJECT dis=NONE) header.from=google.com Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1751883AbeCVVxz (ORCPT + 99 others); Thu, 22 Mar 2018 17:53:55 -0400 Received: from mail-pl0-f65.google.com ([209.85.160.65]:39838 "EHLO mail-pl0-f65.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751541AbeCVVxw (ORCPT ); Thu, 22 Mar 2018 17:53:52 -0400 Received: by mail-pl0-f65.google.com with SMTP id k22-v6so6175872pls.6 for ; Thu, 22 Mar 2018 14:53:52 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=google.com; s=20161025; h=date:from:to:cc:subject:in-reply-to:message-id:references :user-agent:mime-version; bh=Yt4qF+COneS3xHSXrMI+c6cfRvn1q0aHCp9OmB/dhBo=; b=AqR92HRqZADmX2FnDwP96eGWZYAmmBoVeZKHg47WV9ISyboP1KbkCwKYSwMoZmqH7R gfPMHediHWOhDDMUT+TibpHbiJHS4s2M44K3j19348BBQs5c0k8gZ0yBDSqHNKlDjqYQ tivHXwRuUonWZahHBkVNu2dVOsOvlOWXg4YVR0vA4rpk42QocjWaOTMYI3/kjIHlpVQ2 ZQjEWXMx57eZfpKVvWTbljBQ/yNNb7tgHIpmmjeiTfLUbrJ8aW9fUDz7GmE56Wu4gKtj zfMWlmqQsfBlo3wfaSA6HPDhw7k3bQiNyS/BXKKPgcEvoq0MF5Zk/W4pHOuveTWLG8HT 5Itg== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:date:from:to:cc:subject:in-reply-to:message-id :references:user-agent:mime-version; bh=Yt4qF+COneS3xHSXrMI+c6cfRvn1q0aHCp9OmB/dhBo=; b=FGlbtygwslE0iprtJenJPXnptCZGZ+tbmABO4fyat6pik5h14bUq859OkldBtF7SN5 TSiYvXbml2yb5ejCrMBk80v1FOR+Scnx53vCfNTGSInOGLxfHuNBzEwhHXExJRD+3atl vcqiGKfuTWNvGOd95K4EMolfoh4G5PoClyrImkLFFScTZ6HOmqPrGunlKBlvFBVOwVSo Nu8SFEN3OocjdIGsRCRbIOoySw4tOp5tQIphOYh5swxfH5NRTEyLp4eYARAI0jq1PUPT /ytL610rvhDdWQhscGTeeyn2HiUnxidhIuVFQVjoIWfBapKJtXVHtAwxkkVbipLBxrN3 vc/g== X-Gm-Message-State: AElRT7HXs64OqNqR1lvKPM0Bw6WmT8dF6JcZ4ehu/BA2XsK40w6l36Xm 9g22U5Ob72DptGxHLn8H9K2TVQ== X-Received: by 2002:a17:902:b943:: with SMTP id h3-v6mr5103954pls.1.1521755631942; Thu, 22 Mar 2018 14:53:51 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [2620:15c:17:3:3a5:23a7:5e32:4598] ([2620:15c:17:3:3a5:23a7:5e32:4598]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id o28sm15087876pfa.62.2018.03.22.14.53.51 (version=TLS1_2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128/128); Thu, 22 Mar 2018 14:53:51 -0700 (PDT) Date: Thu, 22 Mar 2018 14:53:50 -0700 (PDT) From: David Rientjes X-X-Sender: rientjes@chino.kir.corp.google.com To: Andrew Morton , Roman Gushchin cc: Michal Hocko , Vladimir Davydov , Johannes Weiner , Tejun Heo , cgroups@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-mm@kvack.org Subject: [patch v2 -mm 3/6] mm, memcg: add hierarchical usage oom policy In-Reply-To: Message-ID: References: User-Agent: Alpine 2.20 (DEB 67 2015-01-07) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org One of the three significant concerns brought up about the cgroup aware oom killer is that its decisionmaking is completely evaded by creating subcontainers and attaching processes such that the ancestor's usage does not exceed another cgroup on the system. Consider the example from the previous patch where "memory" is set in each mem cgroup's cgroup.controllers: mem cgroup cgroup.procs ========== ============ /cg1 1 process consuming 250MB /cg2 3 processes consuming 100MB each /cg3/cg31 2 processes consuming 100MB each /cg3/cg32 2 processes consuming 100MB each If memory.oom_policy is "cgroup", a process from /cg2 is chosen because it is in the single indivisible memory consumer with the greatest usage. The true usage of /cg3 is actually 400MB, but a process from /cg2 is chosen because cgroups are compared individually rather than hierarchically. If a system is divided into two users, for example: mem cgroup memory.max ========== ========== /userA 250MB /userB 250MB If /userA runs all processes attached to the local mem cgroup, whereas /userB distributes their processes over a set of subcontainers under /userB, /userA will be unfairly penalized. There is incentive with cgroup v2 to distribute processes over a set of subcontainers if those processes shall be constrained by other cgroup controllers; this is a direct result of mandating a single, unified hierarchy for cgroups. A user may also reasonably do this for mem cgroup control or statistics. And, a user may do this to evade the cgroup-aware oom killer selection logic. This patch adds an oom policy, "tree", that accounts for hierarchical usage when comparing cgroups and the cgroup aware oom killer is enabled by an ancestor. This allows administrators, for example, to require users in their own top-level mem cgroup subtree to be accounted for with hierarchical usage. In other words, they can longer evade the oom killer by using other controllers or subcontainers. If an oom policy of "tree" is in place for a subtree, such as /cg3 above, the hierarchical usage is used for comparisons with other cgroups if either "cgroup" or "tree" is the oom policy of the oom mem cgroup. Thus, if /cg3/memory.oom_policy is "tree", one of the processes from /cg3's subcontainers is chosen for oom kill. Signed-off-by: David Rientjes --- Documentation/cgroup-v2.txt | 17 ++++++++++++++--- include/linux/memcontrol.h | 5 +++++ mm/memcontrol.c | 18 ++++++++++++------ 3 files changed, 31 insertions(+), 9 deletions(-) diff --git a/Documentation/cgroup-v2.txt b/Documentation/cgroup-v2.txt --- a/Documentation/cgroup-v2.txt +++ b/Documentation/cgroup-v2.txt @@ -1080,6 +1080,10 @@ PAGE_SIZE multiple when read back. memory consumers; that is, they will compare mem cgroup usage rather than process memory footprint. See the "OOM Killer" section below. + If "tree", the OOM killer will compare mem cgroups and its subtree + as a single indivisible memory consumer. This policy cannot be set + on the root mem cgroup. See the "OOM Killer" section below. + When an OOM condition occurs, the policy is dictated by the mem cgroup that is OOM (the root mem cgroup for a system-wide OOM condition). If a descendant mem cgroup has a policy of "none", for @@ -1087,6 +1091,10 @@ PAGE_SIZE multiple when read back. the heuristic will still compare mem cgroups as indivisible memory consumers. + When an OOM condition occurs in a mem cgroup with an OOM policy of + "cgroup" or "tree", the OOM killer will compare mem cgroups with + "cgroup" policy individually with "tree" policy subtrees. + memory.events A read-only flat-keyed file which exists on non-root cgroups. The following entries are defined. Unless specified @@ -1301,7 +1309,7 @@ out of memory, its memory.oom_policy will dictate how the OOM killer will select a process, or cgroup, to kill. Likewise, when the system is OOM, the policy is dictated by the root mem cgroup. -There are currently two available oom policies: +There are currently three available oom policies: - "none": default, choose the largest single memory hogging process to oom kill, as traditionally the OOM killer has always done. @@ -1310,6 +1318,9 @@ There are currently two available oom policies: subtree as an OOM victim and kill at least one process, depending on memory.oom_group, from it. + - "tree": choose the cgroup with the largest memory footprint considering + itself and its subtree and kill at least one process. + When selecting a cgroup as a victim, the OOM killer will kill the process with the largest memory footprint. A user can control this behavior by enabling the per-cgroup memory.oom_group option. If set, it causes the @@ -1328,8 +1339,8 @@ Please, note that memory charges are not migrating if tasks are moved between different memory cgroups. Moving tasks with significant memory footprint may affect OOM victim selection logic. If it's a case, please, consider creating a common ancestor for -the source and destination memory cgroups and enabling oom_group -on ancestor layer. +the source and destination memory cgroups and setting a policy of "tree" +and enabling oom_group on an ancestor layer. IO diff --git a/include/linux/memcontrol.h b/include/linux/memcontrol.h --- a/include/linux/memcontrol.h +++ b/include/linux/memcontrol.h @@ -69,6 +69,11 @@ enum memcg_oom_policy { * mem cgroup as an indivisible consumer */ MEMCG_OOM_POLICY_CGROUP, + /* + * Tree cgroup usage for all descendant memcg groups, treating each mem + * cgroup and its subtree as an indivisible consumer + */ + MEMCG_OOM_POLICY_TREE, }; struct mem_cgroup_reclaim_cookie { diff --git a/mm/memcontrol.c b/mm/memcontrol.c --- a/mm/memcontrol.c +++ b/mm/memcontrol.c @@ -2741,7 +2741,7 @@ static void select_victim_memcg(struct mem_cgroup *root, struct oom_control *oc) /* * The oom_score is calculated for leaf memory cgroups (including * the root memcg). - * Non-leaf oom_group cgroups accumulating score of descendant + * Cgroups with oom policy of "tree" accumulate the score of descendant * leaf memory cgroups. */ rcu_read_lock(); @@ -2750,10 +2750,11 @@ static void select_victim_memcg(struct mem_cgroup *root, struct oom_control *oc) /* * We don't consider non-leaf non-oom_group memory cgroups - * as OOM victims. + * without the oom policy of "tree" as OOM victims. */ if (memcg_has_children(iter) && iter != root_mem_cgroup && - !mem_cgroup_oom_group(iter)) + !mem_cgroup_oom_group(iter) && + iter->oom_policy != MEMCG_OOM_POLICY_TREE) continue; /* @@ -2816,7 +2817,7 @@ bool mem_cgroup_select_oom_victim(struct oom_control *oc) else root = root_mem_cgroup; - if (root->oom_policy != MEMCG_OOM_POLICY_CGROUP) + if (root->oom_policy == MEMCG_OOM_POLICY_NONE) return false; select_victim_memcg(root, oc); @@ -5549,11 +5550,14 @@ static int memory_oom_policy_show(struct seq_file *m, void *v) switch (policy) { case MEMCG_OOM_POLICY_CGROUP: - seq_puts(m, "none [cgroup]\n"); + seq_puts(m, "none [cgroup] tree\n"); + break; + case MEMCG_OOM_POLICY_TREE: + seq_puts(m, "none cgroup [tree]\n"); break; case MEMCG_OOM_POLICY_NONE: default: - seq_puts(m, "[none] cgroup\n"); + seq_puts(m, "[none] cgroup tree\n"); }; return 0; } @@ -5569,6 +5573,8 @@ static ssize_t memory_oom_policy_write(struct kernfs_open_file *of, memcg->oom_policy = MEMCG_OOM_POLICY_NONE; else if (!memcmp("cgroup", buf, min(sizeof("cgroup")-1, nbytes))) memcg->oom_policy = MEMCG_OOM_POLICY_CGROUP; + else if (!memcmp("tree", buf, min(sizeof("tree")-1, nbytes))) + memcg->oom_policy = MEMCG_OOM_POLICY_TREE; else ret = -EINVAL;