From: Johannes Weiner <hannes@cmpxchg.org>
To: Vladimir Davydov <vdavydov@virtuozzo.com>
Cc: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
Michal Hocko <mhocko@kernel.org>,
linux-mm@kvack.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/5] mm: memcontrol: enable kmem accounting for all cgroups in the legacy hierarchy
Date: Mon, 8 Feb 2016 00:46:16 -0500 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20160208054616.GA22202@cmpxchg.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <5e6c9361f901fbfae84fe51ad1d27694d2377bd3.1454864628.git.vdavydov@virtuozzo.com>
On Sun, Feb 07, 2016 at 08:27:31PM +0300, Vladimir Davydov wrote:
> Currently, in the legacy hierarchy kmem accounting is off for all
> cgroups by default and must be enabled explicitly by writing something
> to memory.kmem.limit_in_bytes. Since we don't support reclaim on hitting
> kmem limit, nor do we have any plans to implement it, this is likely to
> be -1, just to enable kmem accounting and limit kernel memory
> consumption by the memory.limit_in_bytes along with user memory.
>
> This user API was introduced when the implementation of kmem accounting
> lacked slab shrinker support and hence was useless in practice. Things
> have changed since then - slab shrinkers were made memcg aware, the
> accounting overhead seems to be negligible, and a failure to charge a
> kmem allocation should not have critical consequences, because we only
> account those kernel objects that should be safe to fail. That's why
> kmem accounting is enabled by default for all cgroups in the default
> hierarchy, which will eventually replace the legacy one.
>
> The ability to enable kmem accounting for some cgroups while keeping it
> disabled for others is getting difficult to maintain. E.g. to make
> shadow node shrinker memcg aware (see mm/workingset.c), we need to know
> the relationship between the number of shadow nodes allocated for a
> cgroup and the size of its lru list. If kmem accounting is enabled for
> all cgroups there is no problem, but what should we do if kmem
> accounting is enabled only for half of cgroups? We've no other choice
> but use global lru stats while scanning root cgroup's shadow nodes, but
> that would be wrong if kmem accounting was enabled for all cgroups
> (which is the case if the unified hierarchy is used), in which case we
> should use lru stats of the root cgroup's lruvec.
>
> That being said, let's enable kmem accounting for all memory cgroups by
> default. If one finds it unstable or too costly, it can always be
> disabled system-wide by passing cgroup.memory=nokmem to the kernel at
> boot time.
>
> Signed-off-by: Vladimir Davydov <vdavydov@virtuozzo.com>
Acked-by: Johannes Weiner <hannes@cmpxchg.org>
A little bolder than I would have preferred for legacy memcg, but I
don't think we have another choice here. And you're right, accounting
costs are a far cry from what they once were. So I'm okay with this.
--
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 prev parent reply other threads:[~2016-02-08 5:46 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 13+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2016-02-07 17:27 [PATCH 0/5] mm: workingset: make shadow node shrinker memcg aware Vladimir Davydov
2016-02-07 17:27 ` [PATCH 1/5] mm: memcontrol: enable kmem accounting for all cgroups in the legacy hierarchy Vladimir Davydov
2016-02-08 5:46 ` Johannes Weiner [this message]
2016-02-07 17:27 ` [PATCH 2/5] mm: vmscan: pass root_mem_cgroup instead of NULL to memcg aware shrinker Vladimir Davydov
2016-02-08 5:47 ` Johannes Weiner
2016-02-07 17:27 ` [PATCH 3/5] mm: memcontrol: zap memcg_kmem_online helper Vladimir Davydov
2016-02-08 5:48 ` Johannes Weiner
2016-02-07 17:27 ` [PATCH 4/5] radix-tree: account radix_tree_node to memory cgroup Vladimir Davydov
2016-02-08 6:01 ` Johannes Weiner
2016-02-07 17:27 ` [PATCH 5/5] mm: workingset: make shadow node shrinker memcg aware Vladimir Davydov
2016-02-08 6:23 ` Johannes Weiner
2016-02-08 14:28 ` Vladimir Davydov
2016-02-08 20:43 ` Johannes Weiner
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=20160208054616.GA22202@cmpxchg.org \
--to=hannes@cmpxchg.org \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
--cc=mhocko@kernel.org \
--cc=vdavydov@virtuozzo.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