Re: [PATCH 2/7] memcg,list_lru: duplicate LRUs upon kmemcg creation

[Kamezawa Hiroyuki <kamezawa.hiroyu@jp.fujitsu.com>]

(2013/02/08 22:07), Glauber Costa wrote:
> When a new memcg is created, we need to open up room for its descriptors
> in all of the list_lrus that are marked per-memcg. The process is quite
> similar to the one we are using for the kmem caches: we initialize the
> new structures in an array indexed by kmemcg_id, and grow the array if
> needed. Key data like the size of the array will be shared between the
> kmem cache code and the list_lru code (they basically describe the same
> thing)
> 
> Signed-off-by: Glauber Costa <glommer@parallels.com>
> Cc: Dave Chinner <dchinner@redhat.com>
> Cc: Mel Gorman <mgorman@suse.de>
> Cc: Rik van Riel <riel@redhat.com>
> Cc: Johannes Weiner <hannes@cmpxchg.org>
> Cc: Michal Hocko <mhocko@suse.cz>
> Cc: Hugh Dickins <hughd@google.com>
> Cc: Kamezawa Hiroyuki <kamezawa.hiroyu@jp.fujitsu.com>
> Cc: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>
> ---
>   include/linux/list_lru.h   |  47 +++++++++++++++++
>   include/linux/memcontrol.h |   6 +++
>   lib/list_lru.c             | 115 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++---
>   mm/memcontrol.c            | 128 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++---
>   mm/slab_common.c           |   1 -
>   5 files changed, 283 insertions(+), 14 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/include/linux/list_lru.h b/include/linux/list_lru.h
> index 02796da..370b989 100644
> --- a/include/linux/list_lru.h
> +++ b/include/linux/list_lru.h
> @@ -16,11 +16,58 @@ struct list_lru_node {
>   	long			nr_items;
>   } ____cacheline_aligned_in_smp;
>   
> +struct list_lru_array {
> +	struct list_lru_node node[1];
> +};

size is up to nr_node_ids ?

> +
>   struct list_lru {
> +	struct list_head	lrus;
>   	struct list_lru_node	node[MAX_NUMNODES];
>   	nodemask_t		active_nodes;
> +#ifdef CONFIG_MEMCG_KMEM
> +	struct list_lru_array	**memcg_lrus;
> +#endif
>   };
size is up to memcg_limited_groups_array_size ?


>   
> +struct mem_cgroup;
> +#ifdef CONFIG_MEMCG_KMEM
> +/*
> + * We will reuse the last bit of the pointer to tell the lru subsystem that
> + * this particular lru should be replicated when a memcg comes in.
> + */
> +static inline void lru_memcg_enable(struct list_lru *lru)
> +{
> +	lru->memcg_lrus = (void *)0x1ULL;
> +}
> +

This "enable" is not used in this patch itself, right ?

> +/*
> + * This will return true if we have already allocated and assignment a memcg
> + * pointer set to the LRU. Therefore, we need to mask the first bit out
> + */
> +static inline bool lru_memcg_is_assigned(struct list_lru *lru)
> +{
> +	return (unsigned long)lru->memcg_lrus & ~0x1ULL;
> +}
> +
> +struct list_lru_array *lru_alloc_array(void);
> +int memcg_update_all_lrus(unsigned long num);
> +void list_lru_destroy(struct list_lru *lru);
> +void list_lru_destroy_memcg(struct mem_cgroup *memcg);
> +#else
> +static inline void lru_memcg_enable(struct list_lru *lru)
> +{
> +}
> +
> +static inline bool lru_memcg_is_assigned(struct list_lru *lru)
> +{
> +	return false;
> +}
> +
> +static inline void list_lru_destroy(struct list_lru *lru)
> +{
> +}
> +#endif
> +
>   int list_lru_init(struct list_lru *lru);
>   int list_lru_add(struct list_lru *lru, struct list_head *item);
>   int list_lru_del(struct list_lru *lru, struct list_head *item);
> diff --git a/include/linux/memcontrol.h b/include/linux/memcontrol.h
> index b7de557..f9558d0 100644
> --- a/include/linux/memcontrol.h
> +++ b/include/linux/memcontrol.h
> @@ -23,6 +23,7 @@
>   #include <linux/vm_event_item.h>
>   #include <linux/hardirq.h>
>   #include <linux/jump_label.h>
> +#include <linux/list_lru.h>
>   
>   struct mem_cgroup;
>   struct page_cgroup;
> @@ -475,6 +476,11 @@ void memcg_update_array_size(int num_groups);
>   struct kmem_cache *
>   __memcg_kmem_get_cache(struct kmem_cache *cachep, gfp_t gfp);
>   
> +int memcg_new_lru(struct list_lru *lru);
> +
> +int memcg_kmem_update_lru_size(struct list_lru *lru, int num_groups,
> +			       bool new_lru);
> +
>   void mem_cgroup_destroy_cache(struct kmem_cache *cachep);
>   void kmem_cache_destroy_memcg_children(struct kmem_cache *s);
>   
> diff --git a/lib/list_lru.c b/lib/list_lru.c
> index 0f08ed6..3b0e89d 100644
> --- a/lib/list_lru.c
> +++ b/lib/list_lru.c
> @@ -8,6 +8,7 @@
>   #include <linux/module.h>
>   #include <linux/mm.h>
>   #include <linux/list_lru.h>
> +#include <linux/memcontrol.h>
>   
>   int
>   list_lru_add(
> @@ -184,18 +185,118 @@ list_lru_dispose_all(
>   	return total;
>   }
>   
> -int
> -list_lru_init(
> -	struct list_lru	*lru)
> +/*
> + * This protects the list of all LRU in the system. One only needs
> + * to take when registering an LRU, or when duplicating the list of lrus.
> + * Transversing an LRU can and should be done outside the lock
> + */
> +static DEFINE_MUTEX(all_lrus_mutex);
> +static LIST_HEAD(all_lrus);
> +
> +static void list_lru_init_one(struct list_lru_node *lru)
> +{
> +	spin_lock_init(&lru->lock);
> +	INIT_LIST_HEAD(&lru->list);
> +	lru->nr_items = 0;
> +}
> +
> +struct list_lru_array *lru_alloc_array(void)
> +{
> +	struct list_lru_array *lru_array;
> +	int i;
> +
> +	lru_array = kzalloc(nr_node_ids * sizeof(struct list_lru_node),
> +				GFP_KERNEL);
> +	if (!lru_array)
> +		return NULL;
> +
> +	for (i = 0; i < nr_node_ids ; i++)
> +		list_lru_init_one(&lru_array->node[i]);
> +
> +	return lru_array;
> +}
> +
> +int __list_lru_init(struct list_lru *lru)
>   {
>   	int i;
>   
>   	nodes_clear(lru->active_nodes);
> -	for (i = 0; i < MAX_NUMNODES; i++) {
> -		spin_lock_init(&lru->node[i].lock);
> -		INIT_LIST_HEAD(&lru->node[i].list);
> -		lru->node[i].nr_items = 0;
> +	for (i = 0; i < MAX_NUMNODES; i++)
> +		list_lru_init_one(&lru->node[i]);

Hmm. lru_list is up to MAX_NUMNODES, your new one is up to nr_node_ids...

> +
> +	return 0;
> +}
> +
> +#ifdef CONFIG_MEMCG_KMEM
> +static int memcg_init_lru(struct list_lru *lru)
> +{
> +	int ret;
> +
> +	if (!lru->memcg_lrus)
> +		return 0;
> +
> +	INIT_LIST_HEAD(&lru->lrus);
> +	mutex_lock(&all_lrus_mutex);
> +	list_add(&lru->lrus, &all_lrus);
> +	ret = memcg_new_lru(lru);
> +	mutex_unlock(&all_lrus_mutex);
> +	return ret;
> +}

 only writer takes this mutex ?

> +
> +int memcg_update_all_lrus(unsigned long num)
> +{
> +	int ret = 0;
> +	struct list_lru *lru;
> +
> +	mutex_lock(&all_lrus_mutex);
> +	list_for_each_entry(lru, &all_lrus, lrus) {
> +		if (!lru->memcg_lrus)
> +			continue;
> +
> +		ret = memcg_kmem_update_lru_size(lru, num, false);
> +		if (ret)
> +			goto out;
> +	}
> +out:
> +	mutex_unlock(&all_lrus_mutex);
> +	return ret;
> +}
> +
> +void list_lru_destroy(struct list_lru *lru)
> +{
> +	if (!lru->memcg_lrus)
> +		return;
> +
> +	mutex_lock(&all_lrus_mutex);
> +	list_del(&lru->lrus);
> +	mutex_unlock(&all_lrus_mutex);
> +}
> +
> +void list_lru_destroy_memcg(struct mem_cgroup *memcg)
> +{
> +	struct list_lru *lru;
> +	mutex_lock(&all_lrus_mutex);
> +	list_for_each_entry(lru, &all_lrus, lrus) {
> +		lru->memcg_lrus[memcg_cache_id(memcg)] = NULL;
> +		/* everybody must beaware that this memcg is no longer valid */

Hm, the object pointed by this array entry will be freed by some other func ?

> +		wmb();
>   	}
> +	mutex_unlock(&all_lrus_mutex);
> +}
> +#else
> +static int memcg_init_lru(struct list_lru *lru)
> +{
>   	return 0;
>   }
> +#endif
> +
> +int list_lru_init(struct list_lru *lru)
> +{
> +	int ret;
> +	ret = __list_lru_init(lru);
> +	if (ret)
> +		return ret;
> +
> +	return memcg_init_lru(lru);
> +}
>   EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(list_lru_init);
> diff --git a/mm/memcontrol.c b/mm/memcontrol.c
> index b1d4dfa..b9e1941 100644
> --- a/mm/memcontrol.c
> +++ b/mm/memcontrol.c
> @@ -3032,16 +3032,30 @@ int memcg_update_cache_sizes(struct mem_cgroup *memcg)
>   	memcg_kmem_set_activated(memcg);
>   
>   	ret = memcg_update_all_caches(num+1);
> -	if (ret) {
> -		ida_simple_remove(&kmem_limited_groups, num);
> -		memcg_kmem_clear_activated(memcg);
> -		return ret;
> -	}
> +	if (ret)
> +		goto out;
> +
> +	/*
> +	 * We should make sure that the array size is not updated until we are
> +	 * done; otherwise we have no easy way to know whether or not we should
> +	 * grow the array.
> +	 */
> +	ret = memcg_update_all_lrus(num + 1);
> +	if (ret)
> +		goto out;
>   
>   	memcg->kmemcg_id = num;
> +
> +	memcg_update_array_size(num + 1);
> +
>   	INIT_LIST_HEAD(&memcg->memcg_slab_caches);
>   	mutex_init(&memcg->slab_caches_mutex);
> +
>   	return 0;
> +out:
> +	ida_simple_remove(&kmem_limited_groups, num);
> +	memcg_kmem_clear_activated(memcg);
> +	return ret;
>   }
>   
>   static size_t memcg_caches_array_size(int num_groups)
> @@ -3121,6 +3135,106 @@ int memcg_update_cache_size(struct kmem_cache *s, int num_groups)
>   	return 0;
>   }
>   
> +/*
> + * memcg_kmem_update_lru_size - fill in kmemcg info into a list_lru
> + *
> + * @lru: the lru we are operating with
> + * @num_groups: how many kmem-limited cgroups we have
> + * @new_lru: true if this is a new_lru being created, false if this
> + * was triggered from the memcg side
> + *
> + * Returns 0 on success, and an error code otherwise.
> + *
> + * This function can be called either when a new kmem-limited memcg appears,
> + * or when a new list_lru is created. The work is roughly the same in two cases,
> + * but in the later we never have to expand the array size.
> + *
> + * This is always protected by the all_lrus_mutex from the list_lru side.
> + */
> +int memcg_kmem_update_lru_size(struct list_lru *lru, int num_groups,
> +			       bool new_lru)
> +{
> +	struct list_lru_array **new_lru_array;
> +	struct list_lru_array *lru_array;
> +

Both are named as array ...confusing ;)

> +	lru_array = lru_alloc_array();
> +	if (!lru_array)
> +		return -ENOMEM;
> +
> +	/* need some fucked up locking around the list acquisition */
> +	if ((num_groups > memcg_limited_groups_array_size) || new_lru) {
> +		int i;
> +		struct list_lru_array **old_array;
> +		size_t size = memcg_caches_array_size(num_groups);
> +
> +		new_lru_array = kzalloc(size * sizeof(void *), GFP_KERNEL);
> +		if (!new_lru_array) {
> +			kfree(lru_array);
> +			return -ENOMEM;
> +		}
> +
> +		for (i = 0; i < memcg_limited_groups_array_size; i++) {
> +			if (!lru_memcg_is_assigned(lru) || lru->memcg_lrus[i])
> +				continue;
> +			new_lru_array[i] =  lru->memcg_lrus[i];
> +		}
> +
> +		old_array = lru->memcg_lrus;
> +		lru->memcg_lrus = new_lru_array;
> +		/*
> +		 * We don't need a barrier here because we are just copying
> +		 * information over. Anybody operating in memcg_lrus will
> +		 * either follow the new array or the old one and they contain
> +		 * exactly the same information. The new space in the end is
> +		 * always empty anyway.
> +		 *
> +		 * We do have to make sure that no more users of the old
> +		 * memcg_lrus array exist before we free, and this is achieved
> +		 * by the synchronize_lru below.
> +		 */
> +		if (lru_memcg_is_assigned(lru)) {
> +			synchronize_rcu();
> +			kfree(old_array);
> +		}
> +
> +	}
> +
> +	if (lru_memcg_is_assigned(lru)) {
> +		lru->memcg_lrus[num_groups - 1] = lru_array;

Can't this pointer already set ?

> +		/*
> +		 * Here we do need the barrier, because of the state transition
> +		 * implied by the assignment of the array. All users should be
> +		 * able to see it
> +		 */
> +		wmb();
> +	}
> +
> +	return 0;
> +
> +}
> +
> +int memcg_new_lru(struct list_lru *lru)
> +{
> +	struct mem_cgroup *iter;
> +
> +	if (!memcg_kmem_enabled())
> +		return 0;
> +
> +	for_each_mem_cgroup(iter) {
> +		int ret;
> +		int memcg_id = memcg_cache_id(iter);
> +		if (memcg_id < 0)
> +			continue;
> +
> +		ret = memcg_kmem_update_lru_size(lru, memcg_id + 1, true);
> +		if (ret) {
> +			mem_cgroup_iter_break(root_mem_cgroup, iter);
> +			return ret;
> +		}
> +	}
> +	return 0;
> +}
> +
>   int memcg_register_cache(struct mem_cgroup *memcg, struct kmem_cache *s,
>   			 struct kmem_cache *root_cache)
>   {
> @@ -5914,8 +6028,10 @@ static void kmem_cgroup_destroy(struct mem_cgroup *memcg)
>   	 * possible that the charges went down to 0 between mark_dead and the
>   	 * res_counter read, so in that case, we don't need the put
>   	 */
> -	if (memcg_kmem_test_and_clear_dead(memcg))
> +	if (memcg_kmem_test_and_clear_dead(memcg)) {
> +		list_lru_destroy_memcg(memcg);
>   		mem_cgroup_put(memcg);
> +	}
>   }
>   #else
>   static int memcg_init_kmem(struct mem_cgroup *memcg, struct cgroup_subsys *ss)
> diff --git a/mm/slab_common.c b/mm/slab_common.c
> indek
x 3f3cd97..2470d11 100644
> --- a/mm/slab_common.c
> +++ b/mm/slab_common.c
> @@ -102,7 +102,6 @@ int memcg_update_all_caches(int num_memcgs)
>   			goto out;
>   	}
>   
> -	memcg_update_array_size(num_memcgs);
>   out:
>   	mutex_unlock(&slab_mutex);
>   	return ret;
> 


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/ .
Don't email: <a href=mailto:"dont@kvack.org"> email@kvack.org </a>