Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1758234AbZDQFTS (ORCPT ); Fri, 17 Apr 2009 01:19:18 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1752944AbZDQFTB (ORCPT ); Fri, 17 Apr 2009 01:19:01 -0400 Received: from fgwmail5.fujitsu.co.jp ([192.51.44.35]:39378 "EHLO fgwmail5.fujitsu.co.jp" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751977AbZDQFTA (ORCPT ); Fri, 17 Apr 2009 01:19:00 -0400 Date: Fri, 17 Apr 2009 14:17:26 +0900 From: KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki To: balbir@linux.vnet.ibm.com Cc: "linux-mm@kvack.org" , "linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" , Andrew Morton Subject: Re: [PATCH] Add file based RSS accounting for memory resource controller (v2) Message-Id: <20090417141726.a69ebdcc.kamezawa.hiroyu@jp.fujitsu.com> In-Reply-To: <20090417045623.GA3896@balbir.in.ibm.com> References: <20090416015955.GB7082@balbir.in.ibm.com> <20090416110246.c3fef293.kamezawa.hiroyu@jp.fujitsu.com> <20090416164036.03d7347a.kamezawa.hiroyu@jp.fujitsu.com> <20090416171535.cfc4ca84.kamezawa.hiroyu@jp.fujitsu.com> <20090416120316.GG7082@balbir.in.ibm.com> <20090417091459.dac2cc39.kamezawa.hiroyu@jp.fujitsu.com> <20090417014042.GB18558@balbir.in.ibm.com> <20090417110350.3144183d.kamezawa.hiroyu@jp.fujitsu.com> <20090417034539.GD18558@balbir.in.ibm.com> <20090417124951.a8472c86.kamezawa.hiroyu@jp.fujitsu.com> <20090417045623.GA3896@balbir.in.ibm.com> Organization: FUJITSU Co. LTD. X-Mailer: Sylpheed 2.5.0 (GTK+ 2.10.14; i686-pc-mingw32) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 6054 Lines: 157 On Fri, 17 Apr 2009 10:26:23 +0530 Balbir Singh wrote: > * KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki [2009-04-17 12:49:51]: > > > On Fri, 17 Apr 2009 09:15:39 +0530 > > Balbir Singh wrote: > > > > > * KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki [2009-04-17 11:03:50]: > > > > > > > On Fri, 17 Apr 2009 07:10:42 +0530 > > > > Balbir Singh wrote: > > > > > > > > > * KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki [2009-04-17 09:14:59]: > > > > > > > > > > > On Thu, 16 Apr 2009 17:33:16 +0530 > > > > > > Balbir Singh wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > * KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki [2009-04-16 17:15:35]: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Sorry, some troubles found. Ignore above Ack. 3points now. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 1. get_cpu should be after (*) > > > > > > > > > ==mem_cgroup_update_mapped_file_stat() > > > > > > > > > + int cpu = get_cpu(); > > > > > > > > > + > > > > > > > > > + if (!page_is_file_cache(page)) > > > > > > > > > + return; > > > > > > > > > + > > > > > > > > > + if (unlikely(!mm)) > > > > > > > > > + mm = &init_mm; > > > > > > > > > + > > > > > > > > > + mem = try_get_mem_cgroup_from_mm(mm); > > > > > > > > > + if (!mem) > > > > > > > > > + return; > > > > > > > > > + ----------------------------------------(*) > > > > > > > > > + stat = &mem->stat; > > > > > > > > > + cpustat = &stat->cpustat[cpu]; > > > > > > > > > + > > > > > > > > > + __mem_cgroup_stat_add_safe(cpustat, MEM_CGROUP_STAT_MAPPED_FILE, val); > > > > > > > > > + put_cpu(); > > > > > > > > > +} > > > > > > > > > == > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Yes or I should have a goto > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 2. In above, "mem" shouldn't be got from "mm"....please get "mem" from page_cgroup. > > > > > > > > > (Because it's file cache, pc->mem_cgroup is not NULL always.) > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Hmmm.. not sure I understand this part. Are you suggesting that mm can > > > > > > > be NULL? > > > > > > No. > > > > > > > > > > > > > I added the check for !mm as a safety check. Since this > > > > > > > routine is only called from rmap context, mm is not NULL, hence mem > > > > > > > should not be NULL. Did you find a race between mm->owner assignment > > > > > > > and lookup via mm->owner? > > > > > > > > > > > > > No. > > > > > > > > > > > > page_cgroup->mem_cgroup != try_get_mem_cgroup_from_mm(mm); in many many cases. > > > > > > > > > > > > For example, libc and /bin/*** is tend to be loaded into default cgroup at boot but > > > > > > used by many cgroups. But mapcount of page caches for /bin/*** is 0 if not running. > > > > > > > > > > > > Then, File_Mapped can be greater than Cached easily if you use mm->owner. > > > > > > > > > > > > I can't estimate RSS in *my* cgroup if File_Mapped includes pages which is under > > > > > > other cgroups. It's meaningless. > > > > > > Especially, when Cached==0 but File_Mapped > 0, I think "oh, the kernel leaks somehing..hmm..." > > > > > > > > > > > > By useing page_cgroup->mem_cgroup, we can avoid above mess. > > > > > > > > > > Yes, I see your point. I wanted mapped_file to show up in the cgroup > > > > > that mapped the page. But this works for me as well, but that means > > > > > we'll nest the page cgroup lock under the PTE lock. > > > > > > > > Don't worry. we do that nest at ANON's uncharge(), already. > > > > > > > > About cost: > > > > > > > > IIUC, the number of "mapcount 0->1/1->0" of file caches are much smaller than > > > > that of o Anon. And there will be not very much cache pingpong. > > > > > > > > If you use PCG_MAPPED flag in page_cgroup (as my patch), you can use > > > > not-atomic version of set/clear when update is only under lock_page_cgroup(). > > > > If you find better way, plz use it. But we can't avoid some kind of atomic ops > > > > for correct accounting, I think. > > > > > > > > > > Can you sign off on your patch, so that I can take it with your > > > signed-off-by. I will also make some minor changes, get_cpu() is not > > > needed, since we are in preempt disable context. > > > > > Hmm, > > Signed-off-by: KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki > > > > But some more clean up is necesarry. > > > > === This part == > > + lock_page_cgroup(pc); > > + mem = pc->mem_cgroup; > > + if (mem) { > > + cpu = get_cpu(); > > + stat = &mem->stat; > > + cpustat = &stat->cpustat[cpu]; > > + if (map) > > > > === Should be == > > + lock_page_cgroup(pc); > > if (!PageCgroupUsed(pc)) { > > unlock_page_cgroup(pc); > > return; > > } > > Do we need this? If the page is mapped, pc should be used right? > About file cache, it'd definitely charged at add-to-radix-tree regardless of being mapped or not. *But* we still have following code. == 820 static int __mem_cgroup_try_charge(struct mm_struct *mm, 821 gfp_t gfp_mask, struct mem_cgroup **memcg, 822 834 /* 835 * We always charge the cgroup the mm_struct belongs to. 836 * The mm_struct's mem_cgroup changes on task migration if the 837 * thread group leader migrates. It's possible that mm is not 838 * set, if so charge the init_mm (happens for pagecache usage). 839 */ 840 mem = *memcg; 841 if (likely(!mem)) { 842 mem = try_get_mem_cgroup_from_mm(mm); 843 *memcg = mem; 844 } else { 845 css_get(&mem->css); 846 } 847 if (unlikely(!mem)) 848 return 0; == So, for _now_, we should use this style of checking page_cgroup is used or not. Until we fix/confirm try_charge() does. Thanks, -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/