From: KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki <kamezawa.hiroyu@jp.fujitsu.com>
To: "akpm@linux-foundation.org" <akpm@linux-foundation.org>
Cc: "linux-mm@kvack.org" <linux-mm@kvack.org>,
"linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
"nishimura@mxp.nes.nec.co.jp" <nishimura@mxp.nes.nec.co.jp>,
"balbir@linux.vnet.ibm.com" <balbir@linux.vnet.ibm.com>,
rientjes@google.com
Subject: [PATCH 1/3] memcg: oom wakeup filter (v5)
Date: Tue, 16 Mar 2010 09:49:51 +0900 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20100316094951.babe938c.kamezawa.hiroyu@jp.fujitsu.com> (raw)
Updated comments.
==
From: KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki <kamezawa.hiroyu@jp.fujitsu.com>
memcg's oom waitqueue is a system-wide wait_queue (for handling hierarchy.)
So, it's better to add custom wake function and do flitering in wake up path.
This patch adds a filtering feature for waking up oom-waiters.
Hierarchy is properly handled.
Changelog 20100316
- fixed comment.
Reviewed-by: Daisuke Nishimura <nishimura@mxp.nes.nec.co.jp>
Cc: Balbir Singh <balbir@in.ibm.com>
Cc: Daisuke Nishimura <nishimura@mxp.nes.nec.co.jp>
Cc: David Rientjes <rientjes@google.com>
Signed-off-by: KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki <kamezawa.hiroyu@jp.fujitsu.com>
---
mm/memcontrol.c | 63 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++----------------
1 file changed, 46 insertions(+), 17 deletions(-)
Index: mmotm-2.6.34-Mar11/mm/memcontrol.c
===================================================================
--- mmotm-2.6.34-Mar11.orig/mm/memcontrol.c
+++ mmotm-2.6.34-Mar11/mm/memcontrol.c
@@ -1293,14 +1293,56 @@ static void mem_cgroup_oom_unlock(struct
static DEFINE_MUTEX(memcg_oom_mutex);
static DECLARE_WAIT_QUEUE_HEAD(memcg_oom_waitq);
+struct oom_wait_info {
+ struct mem_cgroup *mem;
+ wait_queue_t wait;
+};
+
+static int memcg_oom_wake_function(wait_queue_t *wait,
+ unsigned mode, int sync, void *arg)
+{
+ struct mem_cgroup *wake_mem = (struct mem_cgroup *)arg;
+ struct oom_wait_info *oom_wait_info;
+
+ oom_wait_info = container_of(wait, struct oom_wait_info, wait);
+
+ if (oom_wait_info->mem == wake_mem)
+ goto wakeup;
+ /* if no hierarchy, no match */
+ if (!oom_wait_info->mem->use_hierarchy || !wake_mem->use_hierarchy)
+ return 0;
+ /*
+ * Both of oom_wait_info->mem and wake_mem are stable under us.
+ * Then we can use css_is_ancestor without taking care of RCU.
+ */
+ if (!css_is_ancestor(&oom_wait_info->mem->css, &wake_mem->css) &&
+ !css_is_ancestor(&wake_mem->css, &oom_wait_info->mem->css))
+ return 0;
+
+wakeup:
+ return autoremove_wake_function(wait, mode, sync, arg);
+}
+
+static void memcg_wakeup_oom(struct mem_cgroup *mem)
+{
+ /* for filtering, pass "mem" as argument. */
+ __wake_up(&memcg_oom_waitq, TASK_NORMAL, 0, mem);
+}
+
/*
* try to call OOM killer. returns false if we should exit memory-reclaim loop.
*/
bool mem_cgroup_handle_oom(struct mem_cgroup *mem, gfp_t mask)
{
- DEFINE_WAIT(wait);
+ struct oom_wait_info owait;
bool locked;
+ owait.mem = mem;
+ owait.wait.flags = 0;
+ owait.wait.func = memcg_oom_wake_function;
+ owait.wait.private = current;
+ INIT_LIST_HEAD(&owait.wait.task_list);
+
/* At first, try to OOM lock hierarchy under mem.*/
mutex_lock(&memcg_oom_mutex);
locked = mem_cgroup_oom_lock(mem);
@@ -1310,31 +1352,18 @@ bool mem_cgroup_handle_oom(struct mem_cg
* under OOM is always welcomed, use TASK_KILLABLE here.
*/
if (!locked)
- prepare_to_wait(&memcg_oom_waitq, &wait, TASK_KILLABLE);
+ prepare_to_wait(&memcg_oom_waitq, &owait.wait, TASK_KILLABLE);
mutex_unlock(&memcg_oom_mutex);
if (locked)
mem_cgroup_out_of_memory(mem, mask);
else {
schedule();
- finish_wait(&memcg_oom_waitq, &wait);
+ finish_wait(&memcg_oom_waitq, &owait.wait);
}
mutex_lock(&memcg_oom_mutex);
mem_cgroup_oom_unlock(mem);
- /*
- * Here, we use global waitq .....more fine grained waitq ?
- * Assume following hierarchy.
- * A/
- * 01
- * 02
- * assume OOM happens both in A and 01 at the same time. Tthey are
- * mutually exclusive by lock. (kill in 01 helps A.)
- * When we use per memcg waitq, we have to wake up waiters on A and 02
- * in addtion to waiters on 01. We use global waitq for avoiding mess.
- * It will not be a big problem.
- * (And a task may be moved to other groups while it's waiting for OOM.)
- */
- wake_up_all(&memcg_oom_waitq);
+ memcg_wakeup_oom(mem);
mutex_unlock(&memcg_oom_mutex);
if (test_thread_flag(TIF_MEMDIE) || fatal_signal_pending(current))
--
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: <a href=mailto:"dont@kvack.org"> email@kvack.org </a>
next reply other threads:[~2010-03-16 0:53 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 3+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2010-03-16 0:49 KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki [this message]
2010-03-16 0:51 ` [PATCH 2/3] memcg: oom notfier (v5) KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki
2010-03-16 0:54 ` [PATCH 3/3] memcg: oom kill disable and oom status (v5) KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20100316094951.babe938c.kamezawa.hiroyu@jp.fujitsu.com \
--to=kamezawa.hiroyu@jp.fujitsu.com \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=balbir@linux.vnet.ibm.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
--cc=nishimura@mxp.nes.nec.co.jp \
--cc=rientjes@google.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox