From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mail202.messagelabs.com (mail202.messagelabs.com [216.82.254.227]) by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 54C616B0055 for ; Thu, 19 Mar 2009 12:57:35 -0400 (EDT) Received: from d28relay02.in.ibm.com (d28relay02.in.ibm.com [9.184.220.59]) by e28smtp08.in.ibm.com (8.13.1/8.13.1) with ESMTP id n2JGRhuD030236 for ; Thu, 19 Mar 2009 21:57:43 +0530 Received: from d28av01.in.ibm.com (d28av01.in.ibm.com [9.184.220.63]) by d28relay02.in.ibm.com (8.13.8/8.13.8/NCO v9.2) with ESMTP id n2JGs2e44305032 for ; Thu, 19 Mar 2009 22:24:02 +0530 Received: from d28av01.in.ibm.com (loopback [127.0.0.1]) by d28av01.in.ibm.com (8.13.1/8.13.3) with ESMTP id n2JGvO5E011539 for ; Thu, 19 Mar 2009 22:27:25 +0530 From: Balbir Singh Date: Thu, 19 Mar 2009 22:27:13 +0530 Message-Id: <20090319165713.27274.94129.sendpatchset@localhost.localdomain> Subject: [PATCH 0/5] Memory controller soft limit patches (v7) Sender: owner-linux-mm@kvack.org To: linux-mm@kvack.org Cc: YAMAMOTO Takashi , lizf@cn.fujitsu.com, KOSAKI Motohiro , Balbir Singh , Rik van Riel , Andrew Morton , KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki List-ID: From: Balbir Singh New Feature: Soft limits for memory resource controller. Changelog v7...v6 1. Added checks in reclaim path to make sure we don't infinitely loop 2. Refactored reclaim options into a new patch 3. Tested several scenarios, see tests below Changelog v6...v5 1. If the number of reclaimed pages are zero, select the next mem cgroup for reclamation 2. Fixed a bug, where key was being updated after insertion into the tree 3. Fixed a build issue, when CONFIG_MEM_RES_CTLR is not enabled Changelog v5...v4 1. Several changes to the reclaim logic, please see the patch 4 (reclaim on contention). I've experimented with several possibilities for reclaim and chose to come back to this due to the excellent behaviour seen while testing the patchset. 2. Reduced the overhead of soft limits on resource counters very significantly. Reaim benchmark now shows almost no drop in performance. Changelog v4...v3 1. Adopted suggestions from Kamezawa to do a per-zone-per-node reclaim while doing soft limit reclaim. We don't record priorities while doing soft reclaim 2. Some of the overheads associated with soft limits (like calculating excess each time) is eliminated 3. The time_after(jiffies, 0) bug has been fixed 4. Tasks are throttled if the mem cgroup they belong to is being soft reclaimed and at the same time tasks are increasing the memory footprint and causing the mem cgroup to exceed its soft limit. Changelog v3...v2 1. Implemented several review comments from Kosaki-San and Kamezawa-San Please see individual changelogs for changes Changelog v2...v1 1. Soft limits now support hierarchies 2. Use spinlocks instead of mutexes for synchronization of the RB tree Here is v7 of the new soft limit implementation. Soft limits is a new feature for the memory resource controller, something similar has existed in the group scheduler in the form of shares. The CPU controllers interpretation of shares is very different though. Soft limits are the most useful feature to have for environments where the administrator wants to overcommit the system, such that only on memory contention do the limits become active. The current soft limits implementation provides a soft_limit_in_bytes interface for the memory controller and not for memory+swap controller. The implementation maintains an RB-Tree of groups that exceed their soft limit and starts reclaiming from the group that exceeds this limit by the maximum amount. So far I have the best test results with this patchset. I've experimented with several approaches and methods. I might be a little delayed in responding, I might have intermittent access to the internet for the next few days. TODOs 1. The current implementation maintains the delta from the soft limit and pushes back groups to their soft limits, a ratio of delta/soft_limit might be more useful Tests ----- I've run two memory intensive workloads with differing soft limits and seen that they are pushed back to their soft limit on contention. Their usage was their soft limit plus additional memory that they were able to grab on the system. Soft limit can take a while before we see the expected results. The other tests I've run are 1. Deletion of groups while soft limit is in progress in the hierarchy 2. Setting the soft limit to zero and running other groups with non-zero soft limits. 3. Setting the soft limit to zero and testing if the mem cgroup is able to use available memory 4. Tested the patches with hierarchy enabled 5. Tested with swapoff -a, to make sure we don't go into an infinite loop Please review, comment. Series ------ memcg-soft-limits-documentation.patch memcg-soft-limits-interface.patch memcg-soft-limits-organize.patch memcg-soft-limits-refactor-reclaim-bits memcg-soft-limits-reclaim-on-contention.patch -- Balbir -- To unsubscribe, send a message with 'unsubscribe linux-mm' in the body to majordomo@kvack.org. For more info on Linux MM, see: http://www.linux-mm.org/ . Don't email: email@kvack.org