linux-mm.kvack.org archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Shakeel Butt <shakeelb@google.com>
To: Yafang Shao <laoar.shao@gmail.com>
Cc: Johannes Weiner <hannes@cmpxchg.org>,
	Michal Hocko <mhocko@kernel.org>,
	Vladimir Davydov <vdavydov.dev@gmail.com>,
	Cgroups <cgroups@vger.kernel.org>, Linux MM <linux-mm@kvack.org>,
	LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] mm: avoid bothering interrupted task when charge memcg in softirq
Date: Sat, 14 Jul 2018 23:34:30 -0700	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <CALvZod6F4vM_U0obH1aU3iJqRs-3JEfR4cHKZoB9JVLTgdSmSQ@mail.gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CALOAHbBQurMrE6ZCLLsdmbqFrUX3vFVpZtFLvvL_WGnPoF0OSA@mail.gmail.com>

On Sat, Jul 14, 2018 at 10:26 PM Yafang Shao <laoar.shao@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> On Sun, Jul 15, 2018 at 12:25 PM, Shakeel Butt <shakeelb@google.com> wrote:
> > On Sat, Jul 14, 2018 at 7:10 PM Yafang Shao <laoar.shao@gmail.com> wrote:
> >>
> >> On Sat, Jul 14, 2018 at 11:38 PM, Shakeel Butt <shakeelb@google.com> wrote:
> >> > On Sat, Jul 14, 2018 at 1:32 AM Yafang Shao <laoar.shao@gmail.com> wrote:
> >> >>
> >> >> try_charge maybe executed in packet receive path, which is in interrupt
> >> >> context.
> >> >> In this situation, the 'current' is the interrupted task, which may has
> >> >> no relation to the rx softirq, So it is nonsense to use 'current'.
> >> >>
> >> >
> >> > Have you actually seen this occurring?
> >>
> >> Hi Shakeel,
> >>
> >> I'm trying to produce this issue, but haven't find it occur yet.
> >>
> >> > I am not very familiar with the
> >> > network code but I can think of two ways try_charge() can be called
> >> > from network code. Either through kmem charging or through
> >> > mem_cgroup_charge_skmem() and both locations correctly handle
> >> > interrupt context.
> >> >
> >>
> >> Why do you say that mem_cgroup_charge_skmem() correctly hanle
> >> interrupt context ?
> >>
> >> Let me show you why mem_cgroup_charge_skmem isn't hanling interrupt
> >> context correctly.
> >>
> >> mem_cgroup_charge_skmem() is calling  try_charge() twice.
> >> The first one is with GFP_NOWAIT as the gfp_mask, and the second one
> >> is with  (GFP_NOWAIT |  __GFP_NOFAIL) as the gfp_mask.
> >>
> >> If page_counter_try_charge() failes at the first time, -ENOMEM is returned.
> >> Then mem_cgroup_charge_skmem() will call try_charge() once more with
> >> __GFP_NOFAIL set, and this time if If page_counter_try_charge() failes
> >> again the '
> >> force' label in  try_charge() will be executed and 0 is returned.
> >>
> >> No matter what, the 'current' will be used and touched, that is
> >> meaning mem_cgroup_charge_skmem() isn't hanling the interrupt context
> >> correctly.
> >>
> >
> > Hi Yafang,
> >
> > If you check mem_cgroup_charge_skmem(), the memcg passed is not
> > 'current' but is from the sock object i.e. sk->sk_memcg for which the
> > network buffer is allocated for.
> >
>
> That's correct, the memcg if from the sock object.
> But the point is, in this situation why 'current' is used in try_charge() ?
> As 'current' is not related with the memcg, which is just a interrupted task.
>

Hmm so you mean the behavior of memcg charging in the interrupt
context depends on the state of the interrupted task. As you have
noted, mem_cgroup_charge_skmem() tries charging again with
__GFP_NOFAIL and the charge succeeds. Basically the memcg charging by
mem_cgroup_charge_skmem() will always succeed irrespective of the
state of the interrupted task. However mem_cgroup_charge_skmem() can
return true if the interrupted task was exiting or a fatal signal is
pending or oom victim or reclaiming memory. Can you please explain why
this is bad?

Shakeel

  reply	other threads:[~2018-07-15  6:34 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 15+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2018-07-14  8:32 Yafang Shao
2018-07-14 15:38 ` Shakeel Butt
2018-07-15  2:10   ` Yafang Shao
2018-07-15  2:25     ` Yafang Shao
2018-07-15  4:25     ` Shakeel Butt
2018-07-15  5:25       ` Yafang Shao
2018-07-15  6:34         ` Shakeel Butt [this message]
2018-07-15  8:01           ` Yafang Shao
2018-07-15 15:04             ` Shakeel Butt
2018-07-16  1:49               ` Yafang Shao
2018-07-16  3:09                 ` Shakeel Butt
2018-07-16  3:38                   ` Yafang Shao
2018-07-16  7:58 ` Michal Hocko
2018-07-16  9:45   ` Yafang Shao
2018-07-16 11:08     ` 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=CALvZod6F4vM_U0obH1aU3iJqRs-3JEfR4cHKZoB9JVLTgdSmSQ@mail.gmail.com \
    --to=shakeelb@google.com \
    --cc=cgroups@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=hannes@cmpxchg.org \
    --cc=laoar.shao@gmail.com \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
    --cc=mhocko@kernel.org \
    --cc=vdavydov.dev@gmail.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