From: KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki <kamezawa.hiroyu@jp.fujitsu.com>
To: Ying Han <yinghan@google.com>
Cc: Johannes Weiner <hannes@cmpxchg.org>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
Michal Hocko <mhocko@suse.cz>, Mel Gorman <mel@csn.ul.ie>,
Rik van Riel <riel@redhat.com>, Hillf Danton <dhillf@gmail.com>,
Hugh Dickins <hughd@google.com>,
Dan Magenheimer <dan.magenheimer@oracle.com>,
linux-mm@kvack.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH V2] memcg: add mlock statistic in memory.stat
Date: Fri, 20 Apr 2012 15:16:55 +0900 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <4F90FF57.9060401@jp.fujitsu.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CALWz4iw5+ypsD_vwm6vcDKN-JrV_riF4mFvQME2zr2jR_iNuOg@mail.gmail.com>
(2012/04/20 14:57), Ying Han wrote:
> On Thu, Apr 19, 2012 at 5:37 PM, KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki
> <kamezawa.hiroyu@jp.fujitsu.com> wrote:
>> (2012/04/19 22:12), Johannes Weiner wrote:
>>> Plus this code runs for ALL uncharges, the unlikely() and preliminary
>>> flag testing don't make it okay. It's bad that we have this in the
>>> allocator, but at least it would be good to hook into that branch and
>>> not add another one.
>>>
>>> pc->mem_cgroup stays intact after the uncharge. Could we make the
>>> memcg removal path wait on the mlock counter to drop to zero instead
>>> and otherwise keep Ying's version?
>>>
>>
>>
>> handling problem in ->destroy() path ? Hmm, it will work against use-after-free.
>
>> But accounting problem which may be caused by mem_cgroup_lru_add_list() cannot
>> be handled, which overwrites pc->mem_cgroup.
>
> Kame, can you clarify that? What the mem_cgroup_lru_add_list() has
> anything to do w/ this problem?
>
It overwrites pc->mem_cgroup. Then, Assume a task in cgroup "A".
1. page is charged. pc->mem_cgroup = A + Used bit.
2. page is set Mlocked. A's mlock-counter += 1
3. page is uncharged - Used bit.
4. page is added to lru pc->mem_cgroup = root
5. page is freed root's mlock-coutner -=1,
Then, A's mlock-counter +1, root's mlock-counter -1 IF free_pages()
really handle mlocked pages...
>>
>> But hm, is this too slow ?...
>> ==
>> mem_cgroup_uncharge_common()
>> {
>> ....
>> if (PageSwapCache(page) || PageMlocked(page))
>> return NULL;
>> }
>>
>> page_alloc.c::
>>
>> static inline void free_page_mlock(struct page *page)
>> {
>>
>> __dec_zone_page_state(page, NR_MLOCK);
>> __count_vm_event(UNEVICTABLE_MLOCKFREED);
>>
>> mem_cgroup_uncharge_page(page);
>> }
>> ==
>>
>> BTW, at reading code briefly....why we have hooks in free_page() ?
>>
>> It seems do_munmap() and exit_mmap() calls munlock_vma_pages_all().
>> So, it seems all vmas which has VM_MLOCKED are checked before freeing.
>> vmscan never frees mlocked pages, I think.
>>
>> Any other path to free mlocked pages without munlock ?
>
> I found this commit which introduced the hook in the freeing path,
> however I couldn't get more details why it was introduced from the
> commit description
>
> commit 985737cf2ea096ea946aed82c7484d40defc71a8
> Author: Lee Schermerhorn <lee.schermerhorn@hp.com>
> Date: Sat Oct 18 20:26:53 2008 -0700
>
> mlock: count attempts to free mlocked page
>
> Allow free of mlock()ed pages. This shouldn't happen, but during
> developement, it occasionally did.
>
> This patch allows us to survive that condition, while keeping the
> statistics and events correct for debug.
>
>> I feel freeing Mlocked page is a cause of problems.
>
Sigh...."This shouldn't happen"!!!!!
How about adding warning to free_page() path and remove your current hook ?
Thanks,
-Kame
--
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/ .
Fight unfair telecom internet charges in Canada: sign http://stopthemeter.ca/
Don't email: <a href=mailto:"dont@kvack.org"> email@kvack.org </a>
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2012-04-20 6:20 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 13+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2012-04-18 18:21 Ying Han
2012-04-18 23:33 ` Andrew Morton
2012-04-19 0:59 ` KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki
2012-04-19 13:12 ` Johannes Weiner
2012-04-19 22:46 ` Ying Han
2012-04-19 23:04 ` Johannes Weiner
2012-04-20 0:37 ` KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki
2012-04-20 5:57 ` Ying Han
2012-04-20 6:16 ` KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki [this message]
2012-04-20 6:39 ` Ying Han
2012-04-20 6:52 ` KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki
2012-04-19 22:43 ` Ying Han
2012-04-19 22:30 ` Ying Han
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=4F90FF57.9060401@jp.fujitsu.com \
--to=kamezawa.hiroyu@jp.fujitsu.com \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=dan.magenheimer@oracle.com \
--cc=dhillf@gmail.com \
--cc=hannes@cmpxchg.org \
--cc=hughd@google.com \
--cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
--cc=mel@csn.ul.ie \
--cc=mhocko@suse.cz \
--cc=riel@redhat.com \
--cc=yinghan@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