Received: by 2002:a05:6a10:9848:0:0:0:0 with SMTP id x8csp86925pxf; Tue, 30 Mar 2021 20:26:28 -0700 (PDT) X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJzF6lL/847Ej+JhqvFVsFToEhVrfHyylzOUwC8kmKSKSgMFL53sAy666VBH4h4UV4Hf8mNr X-Received: by 2002:a17:906:7d82:: with SMTP id v2mr1326330ejo.524.1617161188780; Tue, 30 Mar 2021 20:26:28 -0700 (PDT) ARC-Seal: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; t=1617161188; cv=none; d=google.com; s=arc-20160816; b=H54zRhdO9gaObWnYzLj/EavPJL8JTemRoB4YoxESgkf80sRgnInyLOz9xNjan+rG7q T/tzT9Q+qfaE3SS+j+v7IOzHf5FikbYyleJAUpnwu0ls0+J0ZMP7HfUZCPBkUB4uwvLw 9FsiVKUo9rq4YvsD50Rk8qLDVJdrNgkHwzXie6bM156VgVWnr/7Y3lMFAaN78xe6IDg3 KzgLo7NfwIwbBAmLiDq+u2twZuYjZelzVSUEFA/Z0ZXtMGN217/a3RaMi2pDySrqm0ay 9Kw5qC5xk+u5dSXdJZmOLSy+65wSvU83SXw6+RjLPZyrnjo1cwoO+4To4jQ65fSlJhQf j5jg== ARC-Message-Signature: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=google.com; s=arc-20160816; h=list-id:precedence:in-reply-to:content-disposition:mime-version :references:message-id:subject:cc:to:from:date:dkim-signature; bh=FNFeV1THEx0YJSM2iKHTR5ELuwAnphzmvmgnTdnbeIU=; b=XWTu5LEVaMfHmT3LIvSA8WxOq/6iRrXcWfCj3FOnOYshSOvEfjtz+pe2bdjYMZxM5G bQE5A1xP1C/uftOTNs8XvLlBoxhUI9UAEz69+88tCN8/FqPWXP30w/cNMkCrfZNfP4rA vKbC1KyPQhs0Uam7bwRmQqp52Tu5FTvZqBOkfio8xT5VJE3kPxy49HN6CULg6EhVhgus TnqoSzkNUIYQJXDeHf+dVIoSGJmXUoNnsv0iY2IN3Uce3UHXQVRdkSpaA0s2i0RVBemE Q8H400sE5iC4hrE0jq3dX9wIKIYsjvcRITljV5ek4eLLganfK4USMwqgdzFHyj88Lno0 R55A== ARC-Authentication-Results: i=1; mx.google.com; dkim=pass header.i=@google.com header.s=20161025 header.b=mrlwgL3j; spf=pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 23.128.96.18 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. [23.128.96.18]) by mx.google.com with ESMTP id g12si778368eds.274.2021.03.30.20.26.05; Tue, 30 Mar 2021 20:26:28 -0700 (PDT) Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 23.128.96.18 as permitted sender) client-ip=23.128.96.18; Authentication-Results: mx.google.com; dkim=pass header.i=@google.com header.s=20161025 header.b=mrlwgL3j; spf=pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 23.128.96.18 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 S232874AbhCaDYi (ORCPT + 99 others); Tue, 30 Mar 2021 23:24:38 -0400 Received: from lindbergh.monkeyblade.net ([23.128.96.19]:43380 "EHLO lindbergh.monkeyblade.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S233288AbhCaDY2 (ORCPT ); Tue, 30 Mar 2021 23:24:28 -0400 Received: from mail-pj1-x102f.google.com (mail-pj1-x102f.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4864:20::102f]) by lindbergh.monkeyblade.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 279C2C061574 for ; Tue, 30 Mar 2021 20:24:28 -0700 (PDT) Received: by mail-pj1-x102f.google.com with SMTP id nh23-20020a17090b3657b02900c0d5e235a8so520645pjb.0 for ; Tue, 30 Mar 2021 20:24:28 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=google.com; s=20161025; h=date:from:to:cc:subject:message-id:references:mime-version :content-disposition:in-reply-to; bh=FNFeV1THEx0YJSM2iKHTR5ELuwAnphzmvmgnTdnbeIU=; b=mrlwgL3jkCGnWhDPLrfQu3CUgGf6iybj45FrMBrjXLrO5aR7NIKUuW/895SYkIK6fl 7csDYsdgLASvdzuAAl68UhrzAAPlYRZyUB5akfNTrp88ilPxGquve9zK+YgbOQ5mRybq RDbKIkVFyrA7jfmLBSpPAh+2m5pLdWSsQWEGlZU4k3WM2yyOOtZ0AaOKRNU8MAYo2lKQ mSjXhbCXanNU6bIFwidSqOACOqLS1z5avSe+o/V6/iIOGV3tgnsXDTCwd8zk1TF+Ghje uYYNzo6p4NCr5gK/Izlx1Z44S+eKtCNL1K7AQHLrLiwFomfolR8pOZGj2qVoNSpGRRtW ch0g== 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:message-id:references :mime-version:content-disposition:in-reply-to; bh=FNFeV1THEx0YJSM2iKHTR5ELuwAnphzmvmgnTdnbeIU=; b=icuLOx20IwRQpEqDz6WF9R8j8s0jJIlXmx8DMoIv1StNpPz7fMpr1ceEDKNqER0Qjg kcWvOj78LvI46rC6EfEaqmdMG8eU1Vt7SOhU6ERNTquHlEsUR0NBqWSTyUQLmVevLH3C kqHkQNElerjbLLgXaA9z4YWk436VQgCe9rrEr8obyqqBiLIPBuyOuYb0Lp2qr+VHWf7d sQOsJOt60xiXgzPLrfDKZvg0s4xN/TfkvtAvYtRnUKEyfLwVKLz26XVvSM4ZfONNK3kw 1OarKUggKg6JNfnm8uqzei/c/yqGf+EQFS7AvCtBDgpjwBxfCN4IM0fGElyQOLkRCNjM hh/w== X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM532oAyb6KuOl0pJJ3iEGWS6ScUm79m24aUfrsKY90HEEB0v5IfHd 1AlkXUzNl12EkwnuyVQB+gjEcQ== X-Received: by 2002:a17:90a:5889:: with SMTP id j9mr1452688pji.69.1617161067504; Tue, 30 Mar 2021 20:24:27 -0700 (PDT) Received: from google.com (240.111.247.35.bc.googleusercontent.com. [35.247.111.240]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id w22sm383359pfi.133.2021.03.30.20.24.26 (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 bits=256/256); Tue, 30 Mar 2021 20:24:26 -0700 (PDT) Date: Wed, 31 Mar 2021 03:24:23 +0000 From: Sean Christopherson To: Wanpeng Li Cc: Paolo Bonzini , Vitaly Kuznetsov , Wanpeng Li , Jim Mattson , Joerg Roedel , kvm , LKML Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/2] KVM: Account memory allocations for 'struct kvm_vcpu' Message-ID: References: <20210331023025.2485960-1-seanjc@google.com> <20210331023025.2485960-2-seanjc@google.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Wed, Mar 31, 2021, Wanpeng Li wrote: > On Wed, 31 Mar 2021 at 10:32, Sean Christopherson wrote: > > > > Use GFP_KERNEL_ACCOUNT for the vCPU allocations, the vCPUs are very much > > tied to a single task/VM. For x86, the allocations were accounted up > > until the allocation code was moved to common KVM. For all other > > architectures, vCPU allocations were never previously accounted, but only > > because most architectures lack accounting in general (for KVM). > > > > Fixes: e529ef66e6b5 ("KVM: Move vcpu alloc and init invocation to common code") > > Signed-off-by: Sean Christopherson > > --- > > virt/kvm/kvm_main.c | 2 +- > > 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-) > > > > diff --git a/virt/kvm/kvm_main.c b/virt/kvm/kvm_main.c > > index 383df23514b9..3884e9f30251 100644 > > --- a/virt/kvm/kvm_main.c > > +++ b/virt/kvm/kvm_main.c > > @@ -3182,7 +3182,7 @@ static int kvm_vm_ioctl_create_vcpu(struct kvm *kvm, u32 id) > > if (r) > > goto vcpu_decrement; > > > > - vcpu = kmem_cache_zalloc(kvm_vcpu_cache, GFP_KERNEL); > > + vcpu = kmem_cache_zalloc(kvm_vcpu_cache, GFP_KERNEL_ACCOUNT); > > kvm_vcpu_cache is created with SLAB_ACCOUNT flag in kvm_init(), this > flag will guarantee further slab alloc will be charged to memcg. > Please refer to memcg_slab_pre_alloc_hook(). So the patch is > unnecessary. Hmm, I missed that. However, AFICT only SLAB/SLUB enforce SLAB_ACCOUNT, SLOB does not appear to honor the flag. The caveat to SLOB is that the GFP_KERNEL_ACCOUNT will only come into play when allocating new pages, and so allocations smaller than a page will be accounted incorrectly (I think). But, a vcpu is larger than a page (on x86), which means the vcpu allocation will always be correctly accounted. I've no idea if anyone actually uses KVM+SLOB, let alone cares about accounting in the that case. But, it would be nice for KVM to be consistent with the other kmem_cache usage in KVM, all of which do double up on SLAB_ACCOUNT + GFP_KERNEL_ACCOUNT. Maybe rewrite the changelog and drop the Fixes?