From: Johannes Weiner <hannes@cmpxchg.org>
To: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>
Cc: Michal Hocko <mhocko@suse.cz>,
Vladimir Davydov <vdavydov@parallels.com>,
linux-mm@kvack.org, cgroups@vger.kernel.org,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [patch 2/2] mm: memcontrol: fix missed end-writeback page accounting
Date: Thu, 23 Oct 2014 09:54:12 -0400 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20141023135412.GA24269@phnom.home.cmpxchg.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20141022133936.44f2d2931948ce13477b5e64@linux-foundation.org>
On Wed, Oct 22, 2014 at 01:39:36PM -0700, Andrew Morton wrote:
> On Wed, 22 Oct 2014 14:29:28 -0400 Johannes Weiner <hannes@cmpxchg.org> wrote:
>
> > 0a31bc97c80c ("mm: memcontrol: rewrite uncharge API") changed page
> > migration to uncharge the old page right away. The page is locked,
> > unmapped, truncated, and off the LRU, but it could race with writeback
> > ending, which then doesn't unaccount the page properly:
> >
> > test_clear_page_writeback() migration
> > acquire pc->mem_cgroup->move_lock
> > wait_on_page_writeback()
> > TestClearPageWriteback()
> > mem_cgroup_migrate()
> > clear PCG_USED
> > if (PageCgroupUsed(pc))
> > decrease memcg pages under writeback
> > release pc->mem_cgroup->move_lock
> >
> > The per-page statistics interface is heavily optimized to avoid a
> > function call and a lookup_page_cgroup() in the file unmap fast path,
> > which means it doesn't verify whether a page is still charged before
> > clearing PageWriteback() and it has to do it in the stat update later.
> >
> > Rework it so that it looks up the page's memcg once at the beginning
> > of the transaction and then uses it throughout. The charge will be
> > verified before clearing PageWriteback() and migration can't uncharge
> > the page as long as that is still set. The RCU lock will protect the
> > memcg past uncharge.
> >
> > As far as losing the optimization goes, the following test results are
> > from a microbenchmark that maps, faults, and unmaps a 4GB sparse file
> > three times in a nested fashion, so that there are two negative passes
> > that don't account but still go through the new transaction overhead.
> > There is no actual difference:
> >
> > old: 33.195102545 seconds time elapsed ( +- 0.01% )
> > new: 33.199231369 seconds time elapsed ( +- 0.03% )
> >
> > The time spent in page_remove_rmap()'s callees still adds up to the
> > same, but the time spent in the function itself seems reduced:
> >
> > # Children Self Command Shared Object Symbol
> > old: 0.12% 0.11% filemapstress [kernel.kallsyms] [k] page_remove_rmap
> > new: 0.12% 0.08% filemapstress [kernel.kallsyms] [k] page_remove_rmap
> >
> > ...
> >
> > @@ -2132,26 +2126,32 @@ cleanup:
> > * account and taking the move_lock in the slowpath.
> > */
> >
> > -void __mem_cgroup_begin_update_page_stat(struct page *page,
> > - bool *locked, unsigned long *flags)
> > +struct mem_cgroup *mem_cgroup_begin_page_stat(struct page *page,
> > + bool *locked,
> > + unsigned long *flags)
>
> It would be useful to document the args here (especially `locked').
> Also the new rcu_read_locking protocol is worth a mention: that it
> exists, what it does, why it persists as long as it does.
Okay, I added full kernel docs that explain the RCU fast path, the
memcg->move_lock slow path, and the lifetime guarantee of RCU in cases
where the page state that is about to change is the only thing pinning
the charge, like in end-writeback.
---
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2014-10-23 13:54 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 12+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2014-10-22 18:29 [patch 0/2] mm: memcontrol: fix race between migration and writeback Johannes Weiner
2014-10-22 18:29 ` [patch 1/2] mm: page-writeback: inline account_page_dirtied() into single caller Johannes Weiner
2014-10-23 12:21 ` Michal Hocko
2014-10-22 18:29 ` [patch 2/2] mm: memcontrol: fix missed end-writeback page accounting Johannes Weiner
2014-10-22 20:39 ` Andrew Morton
2014-10-23 13:54 ` Johannes Weiner [this message]
2014-10-23 15:00 ` Michal Hocko
2014-10-23 13:57 ` Johannes Weiner
2014-10-23 15:03 ` Michal Hocko
2014-10-23 13:03 ` Michal Hocko
2014-10-23 14:14 ` Johannes Weiner
2014-10-23 14:51 ` Michal Hocko
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=20141023135412.GA24269@phnom.home.cmpxchg.org \
--to=hannes@cmpxchg.org \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=cgroups@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
--cc=mhocko@suse.cz \
--cc=vdavydov@parallels.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