linux-mm.kvack.org archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Michal Hocko <mhocko@suse.cz>
To: Tetsuo Handa <penguin-kernel@I-love.SAKURA.ne.jp>
Cc: linux-mm@kvack.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/5] mm: Kill shrinker's global semaphore.
Date: Mon, 24 Nov 2014 17:55:44 +0100	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20141124165544.GB11745@curandero.mameluci.net> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <201411231350.DHI12456.OLOFFJSFtQVMHO@I-love.SAKURA.ne.jp>

On Sun 23-11-14 13:50:50, Tetsuo Handa wrote:
> >From 92aec48e3b2e21c3716654670a24890f34c58683 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
> From: Tetsuo Handa <penguin-kernel@I-love.SAKURA.ne.jp>
> Date: Sun, 23 Nov 2014 13:39:25 +0900
> Subject: [PATCH 2/5] mm: Kill shrinker's global semaphore.
> 
> Currently register_shrinker()/unregister_shrinker() calls down_write()
> while shrink_slab() calls down_read_trylock().

> This implies that the OOM killer becomes disabled because
> shrink_slab() pretends "we reclaimed some slab memory" even
> if "no slab memory can be reclaimed" when somebody calls
> register_shrinker()/unregister_shrinker() while one of shrinker
> functions allocates memory and/or holds mutex which may take
> unpredictably long duration to complete.

Which load would be SLAB mostly that this would matter?

Other than that I thought that {un}register_shrinker are really unlikely
paths called during initialization and tear down which usually do not
happen during OOM conditions.

> This patch replaces global semaphore with per a shrinker refcounter
> so that shrink_slab() can respond "we could not reclaim slab memory"
> when out_of_memory() needs to be called.
> 
> Before this patch, response time of addition/removal are unpredictable
> when one of shrinkers are in use by shrink_slab(), nearly 0 otherwise.
> 
> After this patch, response time of addition is nearly 0. Response time of
> removal remains unpredictable when the shrinker to remove is in use by
> shrink_slab(), nearly two RCU grace periods otherwise.

I cannot judge the patch itself as this is out of my area but is the
complexity worth it? I think the OOM argument is bogus because there
SLAB usually doesn't dominate the memory consumption in my experience.

-- 
Michal Hocko
SUSE Labs

--
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>

  reply	other threads:[~2014-11-24 16:55 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 20+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2014-11-23  4:49 [RFC PATCH 0/5] mm: Patches for mitigating memory allocation stalls Tetsuo Handa
2014-11-23  4:50 ` [PATCH 1/5] mm: Introduce OOM kill timeout Tetsuo Handa
2014-11-24 16:50   ` Michal Hocko
2014-11-24 22:29     ` David Rientjes
2014-11-25 10:38       ` Michal Hocko
2014-11-25 12:54         ` Tetsuo Handa
2014-11-25 13:45           ` Michal Hocko
2014-11-26 11:58             ` Tetsuo Handa
2014-11-26 18:43               ` Michal Hocko
2014-11-27 14:49                 ` Tetsuo Handa
2014-11-28 16:17                   ` Michal Hocko
2014-11-23  4:50 ` [PATCH 2/5] mm: Kill shrinker's global semaphore Tetsuo Handa
2014-11-24 16:55   ` Michal Hocko [this message]
2014-11-23  4:51 ` [PATCH 3/5] mm: Remember ongoing memory allocation status Tetsuo Handa
2014-11-24 17:01   ` Michal Hocko
2014-11-23  4:52 ` [PATCH 4/5] mm: Drop __GFP_WAIT flag when allocating from shrinker functions Tetsuo Handa
2014-11-24 17:14   ` Michal Hocko
2014-11-23  4:53 ` [PATCH 5/5] mm: Insert some delay if ongoing memory allocation stalls Tetsuo Handa
2014-11-24 17:19   ` Michal Hocko
2014-11-24 17:25 ` [RFC PATCH 0/5] mm: Patches for mitigating " 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=20141124165544.GB11745@curandero.mameluci.net \
    --to=mhocko@suse.cz \
    --cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
    --cc=penguin-kernel@I-love.SAKURA.ne.jp \
    /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