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;
From:   Roman Gushchin <guro@fb.com>
To:     Shakeel Butt <shakeelb@google.com>
CC:     Roman Gushchin <guroan@gmail.com>,
        Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
        Linux MM <linux-mm@kvack.org>,
        LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
        Kernel Team <Kernel-team@fb.com>,
        "Johannes Weiner" <hannes@cmpxchg.org>,
        Michal Hocko <mhocko@kernel.org>,
        Rik van Riel <riel@surriel.com>,
        "david@fromorbit.com" <david@fromorbit.com>,
        "Christoph Lameter" <cl@linux.com>,
        Pekka Enberg <penberg@kernel.org>,
        Vladimir Davydov <vdavydov.dev@gmail.com>,
        Cgroups <cgroups@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 4/5] mm: rework non-root kmem_cache lifecycle management
Thread-Topic: [PATCH 4/5] mm: rework non-root kmem_cache lifecycle management
Thread-Index: AQHU9WhFLwAo90XwHUSqs2s91sh5hqZBAzaA//+a0QCAAIqtAIAAFDUA
Date:   Thu, 18 Apr 2019 03:07:37 +0000
Message-ID: <20190418030729.GA5038@castle>
References: <20190417215434.25897-1-guro@fb.com>
 <20190417215434.25897-5-guro@fb.com>
 <CALvZod5K8SM2EQFH1WM9bbwWBtyXWb_PvzJGvF5dg1Z=bdR7zg@mail.gmail.com>
 <20190418003850.GA13977@tower.DHCP.thefacebook.com>
 <CALvZod6UiTeN40RgpE-4zE5zagSifqh3o_AXaw8o-ubVUWf=4w@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <CALvZod6UiTeN40RgpE-4zE5zagSifqh3o_AXaw8o-ubVUWf=4w@mail.gmail.com>
Accept-Language: en-US
Content-Language: en-US
x-ms-exchange-messagesentrepresentingtype: 1
x-originating-ip: [2620:10d:c090:180::3f5]
x-ms-publictraffictype: Email
x-ms-office365-filtering-correlation-id: 87abc140-bcc3-48df-d2c1-08d6c3ab02a1
x-microsoft-antispam: BCL:0;PCL:0;RULEID:(2390118)(7020095)(4652040)(8989299)(5600141)(711020)(4605104)(4534185)(4627221)(201703031133081)(201702281549075)(8990200)(2017052603328)(7193020);SRVR:BYAPR15MB3477;
x-ms-traffictypediagnostic: BYAPR15MB3477:
x-microsoft-antispam-prvs: <BYAPR15MB34771EF43DB9470AAB2AFAF9BE260@BYAPR15MB3477.namprd15.prod.outlook.com>
x-forefront-prvs: 0011612A55
x-forefront-antispam-report: SFV:NSPM;SFS:(10019020)(7916004)(376002)(346002)(136003)(366004)(39860400002)(396003)(55674003)(54094003)(189003)(199004)(33656002)(5660300002)(486006)(52116002)(476003)(76176011)(68736007)(8936002)(316002)(81166006)(99286004)(186003)(54906003)(11346002)(8676002)(53546011)(386003)(6916009)(46003)(6116002)(446003)(7736002)(6506007)(14444005)(71190400001)(71200400001)(305945005)(256004)(97736004)(6486002)(478600001)(7416002)(86362001)(102836004)(25786009)(81156014)(33716001)(1076003)(4326008)(53936002)(93886005)(9686003)(6246003)(229853002)(2906002)(6436002)(6512007)(14454004);DIR:OUT;SFP:1102;SCL:1;SRVR:BYAPR15MB3477;H:BYAPR15MB2631.namprd15.prod.outlook.com;FPR:;SPF:None;LANG:en;PTR:InfoNoRecords;MX:1;A:1;
received-spf: None (protection.outlook.com: fb.com does not designate
 permitted sender hosts)
x-ms-exchange-senderadcheck: 1
x-microsoft-antispam-message-info: OOvb08rZP7Ag0/s7hw+nAGUHEjK+WKpRCONorlIFbJvVjVX4Ra26585ye/81+fU/anYn24VszrAfWzKwPA9KTuYyAVf8IjRdy3lvPXuPGt2kkGkLuOh70lHnsJCVMvgXVoShi2m//9UF9YV/Zk5Q4tzf3VulxSZ0cFba0XLZVQpMkyDQQVAoyfNKfntVjwfC5d6804zMS9fS/lP4vi6JZxxH05eW+7e3yJd3/cdQ3vIZYKovrkb4Q6rcZ9Mey5JjBk46hhtR20EF5x/DMS715/AKkMeXhcwwthdaAF0B1BmqiI/JHBrDMnhgYdHieJlsrgZW119e2AfyCfPIKMaECFtXFa+xoXvt2dJZX4otH+Dxz1Mp1NBYCZmhyUHeMZKu6W3nM2OrY6PSFY4FGO0h2BoLCECX2Z98g0yZtpTiU6g=
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-ID: <247B59BC911AF840B54250803B8E442F@namprd15.prod.outlook.com>
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-Network-Message-Id: 87abc140-bcc3-48df-d2c1-08d6c3ab02a1
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-originalarrivaltime: 18 Apr 2019 03:07:37.4820
 (UTC)
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-fromentityheader: Hosted
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-id: 8ae927fe-1255-47a7-a2af-5f3a069daaa2
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-mailboxtype: HOSTED
X-MS-Exchange-Transport-CrossTenantHeadersStamped: BYAPR15MB3477
X-OriginatorOrg: fb.com
X-Proofpoint-Virus-Version: vendor=fsecure engine=2.50.10434:,, definitions=2019-04-18_02:,,
 signatures=0
X-Proofpoint-Spam-Reason: safe
X-FB-Internal: Safe
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Precedence: bulk
List-ID: <linux-kernel.vger.kernel.org>
X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org

On Wed, Apr 17, 2019 at 06:55:12PM -0700, Shakeel Butt wrote:
> On Wed, Apr 17, 2019 at 5:39 PM Roman Gushchin <guro@fb.com> wrote:
> >
> > On Wed, Apr 17, 2019 at 04:41:01PM -0700, Shakeel Butt wrote:
> > > On Wed, Apr 17, 2019 at 2:55 PM Roman Gushchin <guroan@gmail.com> wro=
te:
> > > >
> > > > This commit makes several important changes in the lifecycle
> > > > of a non-root kmem_cache, which also affect the lifecycle
> > > > of a memory cgroup.
> > > >
> > > > Currently each charged slab page has a page->mem_cgroup pointer
> > > > to the memory cgroup and holds a reference to it.
> > > > Kmem_caches are held by the cgroup. On offlining empty kmem_caches
> > > > are freed, all other are freed on cgroup release.
> > >
> > > No, they are not freed (i.e. destroyed) on offlining, only
> > > deactivated. All memcg kmem_caches are freed/destroyed on memcg's
> > > css_free.
> >
> > You're right, my bad. I was thinking about the corresponding sysfs entr=
y
> > when was writing it. We try to free it from the deactivation path too.
> >
> > >
> > > >
> > > > So the current scheme can be illustrated as:
> > > > page->mem_cgroup->kmem_cache.
> > > >
> > > > To implement the slab memory reparenting we need to invert the sche=
me
> > > > into: page->kmem_cache->mem_cgroup.
> > > >
> > > > Let's make every page to hold a reference to the kmem_cache (we
> > > > already have a stable pointer), and make kmem_caches to hold a sing=
le
> > > > reference to the memory cgroup.
> > >
> > > What about memcg_kmem_get_cache()? That function assumes that by
> > > taking reference on memcg, it's kmem_caches will stay. I think you
> > > need to get reference on the kmem_cache in memcg_kmem_get_cache()
> > > within the rcu lock where you get the memcg through css_tryget_online=
.
> >
> > Yeah, a very good question.
> >
> > I believe it's safe because css_tryget_online() guarantees that
> > the cgroup is online and won't go offline before css_free() in
> > slab_post_alloc_hook(). I do initialize kmem_cache's refcount to 1
> > and drop it on offlining, so it protects the online kmem_cache.
> >
>=20
> Let's suppose a thread doing a remote charging calls
> memcg_kmem_get_cache() and gets an empty kmem_cache of the remote
> memcg having refcnt equal to 1. That thread got a reference on the
> remote memcg but no reference on the kmem_cache. Let's suppose that
> thread got stuck in the reclaim and scheduled away. In the meantime
> that remote memcg got offlined and decremented the refcnt of all of
> its kmem_caches. The empty kmem_cache which the thread stuck in
> reclaim have pointer to can get deleted and may be using an already
> destroyed kmem_cache after coming back from reclaim.
>=20
> I think the above situation is possible unless the thread gets the
> reference on the kmem_cache in memcg_kmem_get_cache().

Yes, you're right and I'm writing a nonsense: css_tryget_online()
can't prevent the cgroup from being offlined.

So, the problem with getting a reference in memcg_kmem_get_cache()
is that it's an atomic operation on the hot path, something I'd like
to avoid.

I can make the refcounter percpu, but it'll add some complexity and size
to the kmem_cache object. Still an option, of course.

I wonder if we can use rcu_read_lock() instead, and bump the refcounter
only if we're going into reclaim.

What do you think?

Thanks!