From: Shakeel Butt <shakeelb@google.com>
To: "Zhang, Cathy" <cathy.zhang@intel.com>
Cc: Eric Dumazet <edumazet@google.com>, Linux MM <linux-mm@kvack.org>,
Cgroups <cgroups@vger.kernel.org>,
Paolo Abeni <pabeni@redhat.com>,
"davem@davemloft.net" <davem@davemloft.net>,
"kuba@kernel.org" <kuba@kernel.org>,
"Brandeburg, Jesse" <jesse.brandeburg@intel.com>,
"Srinivas, Suresh" <suresh.srinivas@intel.com>,
"Chen, Tim C" <tim.c.chen@intel.com>,
"You, Lizhen" <lizhen.you@intel.com>,
"eric.dumazet@gmail.com" <eric.dumazet@gmail.com>,
"netdev@vger.kernel.org" <netdev@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next 1/2] net: Keep sk->sk_forward_alloc as a proper size
Date: Thu, 11 May 2023 09:23:50 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <CALvZod7Y+SxiopRBXOf1HoDKO=Xh8CNPfgz3Etd4XOq5BPc5Ag@mail.gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <IA0PR11MB73557DEAB912737FD61D2873FC749@IA0PR11MB7355.namprd11.prod.outlook.com>
On Thu, May 11, 2023 at 2:27 AM Zhang, Cathy <cathy.zhang@intel.com> wrote:
>
>
>
[...]
>
> Here is the output with the command you paste, it's from system wide,
> I only show pieces of memcached records, and it seems to be a
> callee -> caller stack trace:
>
> 9.02% mc-worker [kernel.vmlinux] [k] page_counter_try_charge
> |
> --9.00%--page_counter_try_charge
> |
> --9.00%--try_charge_memcg
> mem_cgroup_charge_skmem
> |
> --9.00%--__sk_mem_raise_allocated
> __sk_mem_schedule
> |
> |--5.32%--tcp_try_rmem_schedule
> | tcp_data_queue
> | tcp_rcv_established
> | tcp_v4_do_rcv
> | tcp_v4_rcv
> | ip_protocol_deliver_rcu
> | ip_local_deliver_finish
> | ip_local_deliver
> | ip_rcv
> | __netif_receive_skb_one_core
> | __netif_receive_skb
> | process_backlog
> | __napi_poll
> | net_rx_action
> | __do_softirq
> | |
> | --5.32%--do_softirq.part.0
> | __local_bh_enable_ip
> | __dev_queue_xmit
> | ip_finish_output2
> | __ip_finish_output
> | ip_finish_output
> | ip_output
> | ip_local_out
> | __ip_queue_xmit
> | ip_queue_xmit
> | __tcp_transmit_skb
> | tcp_write_xmit
> | __tcp_push_pending_frames
> | tcp_push
> | tcp_sendmsg_locked
> | tcp_sendmsg
> | inet_sendmsg
> | sock_sendmsg
> | ____sys_sendmsg
>
> 8.98% mc-worker [kernel.vmlinux] [k] page_counter_cancel
> |
> --8.97%--page_counter_cancel
> |
> --8.97%--page_counter_uncharge
> drain_stock
> __refill_stock
> refill_stock
> |
> --8.91%--try_charge_memcg
> mem_cgroup_charge_skmem
> |
> --8.91%--__sk_mem_raise_allocated
> __sk_mem_schedule
> |
> |--5.41%--tcp_try_rmem_schedule
> | tcp_data_queue
> | tcp_rcv_established
> | tcp_v4_do_rcv
> | tcp_v4_rcv
> | ip_protocol_deliver_rcu
> | ip_local_deliver_finish
> | ip_local_deliver
> | ip_rcv
> | __netif_receive_skb_one_core
> | __netif_receive_skb
> | process_backlog
> | __napi_poll
> | net_rx_action
> | __do_softirq
> | do_softirq.part.0
> | __local_bh_enable_ip
> | __dev_queue_xmit
> | ip_finish_output2
> | __ip_finish_output
> | ip_finish_output
> | ip_output
> | ip_local_out
> | __ip_queue_xmit
> | ip_queue_xmit
> | __tcp_transmit_skb
> | tcp_write_xmit
> | __tcp_push_pending_frames
> | tcp_push
> | tcp_sendmsg_locked
> | tcp_sendmsg
> | inet_sendmsg
>
> 8.78% mc-worker [kernel.vmlinux] [k] try_charge_memcg
> |
> --8.77%--try_charge_memcg
> |
> --8.76%--mem_cgroup_charge_skmem
> |
> --8.76%--__sk_mem_raise_allocated
> __sk_mem_schedule
> |
> |--5.21%--tcp_try_rmem_schedule
> | tcp_data_queue
> | tcp_rcv_established
> | tcp_v4_do_rcv
> | |
> | --5.21%--tcp_v4_rcv
> | ip_protocol_deliver_rcu
> | ip_local_deliver_finish
> | ip_local_deliver
> | ip_rcv
> | __netif_receive_skb_one_core
> | __netif_receive_skb
> | process_backlog
> | __napi_poll
> | net_rx_action
> | __do_softirq
> | |
> | --5.21%--do_softirq.part.0
> | __local_bh_enable_ip
> | __dev_queue_xmit
> | ip_finish_output2
> | __ip_finish_output
> | ip_finish_output
> | ip_output
> | ip_local_out
> | __ip_queue_xmit
> | ip_queue_xmit
> | __tcp_transmit_skb
> | tcp_write_xmit
> | __tcp_push_pending_frames
> | tcp_push
> | tcp_sendmsg_locked
> | tcp_sendmsg
> | inet_sendmsg
> | sock_sendmsg
> | ____sys_sendmsg
> | ___sys_sendmsg
> | __sys_sendmsg
>
>
> >
I am suspecting we are doing a lot of charging for a specific memcg on
one CPU (or a set of CPUs) and a lot of uncharging on the different
CPU (or a different set of CPUs) and thus both of these code paths are
hitting the slow path a lot.
Eric, I remember we have an optimization in the networking stack that
tries to free the memory on the same CPU where the allocation
happened. Is that optimization enabled for this code path? Or maybe we
should do something similar in memcg code (with the assumption that my
suspicion is correct).
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2023-05-11 16:24 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 39+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
[not found] <20230508020801.10702-1-cathy.zhang@intel.com>
[not found] ` <20230508020801.10702-2-cathy.zhang@intel.com>
2023-05-09 17:19 ` Shakeel Butt
2023-05-09 18:04 ` Chen, Tim C
2023-05-09 18:17 ` Shakeel Butt
2023-05-10 7:03 ` Zhang, Cathy
2023-05-10 7:32 ` Zhang, Cathy
[not found] ` <3887b08ac0e55e27a24d2f66afcfff1961ed9b13.camel@redhat.com>
[not found] ` <CH3PR11MB73459006FCE3887E1EA3B82FFC769@CH3PR11MB7345.namprd11.prod.outlook.com>
[not found] ` <CH3PR11MB73456D792EC6E7614E2EF14DFC769@CH3PR11MB7345.namprd11.prod.outlook.com>
[not found] ` <CANn89iL6Ckuu9vOEvc7A9CBLGuh-EpbwFRxRAchV-6VFyhTUpg@mail.gmail.com>
[not found] ` <CH3PR11MB73458BB403D537CFA96FD8DDFC769@CH3PR11MB7345.namprd11.prod.outlook.com>
[not found] ` <CANn89iJvpgXTwGEiXAkFwY3j3RqVhNzJ_6_zmuRb4w7rUA_8Ug@mail.gmail.com>
2023-05-09 16:09 ` Shakeel Butt
2023-05-10 6:54 ` Zhang, Cathy
2023-05-10 11:11 ` Zhang, Cathy
2023-05-10 11:24 ` Eric Dumazet
2023-05-10 13:52 ` Zhang, Cathy
2023-05-10 15:07 ` Eric Dumazet
2023-05-10 16:09 ` Zhang, Cathy
2023-05-10 19:00 ` Shakeel Butt
2023-05-11 0:53 ` Zhang, Cathy
2023-05-11 6:59 ` Zhang, Cathy
2023-05-11 7:50 ` Eric Dumazet
2023-05-11 9:26 ` Zhang, Cathy
2023-05-11 16:23 ` Shakeel Butt [this message]
2023-05-11 16:35 ` Eric Dumazet
2023-05-11 17:10 ` Shakeel Butt
2023-05-11 21:18 ` Shakeel Butt
2023-05-12 2:38 ` Zhang, Cathy
2023-05-12 3:23 ` Zhang, Cathy
2023-05-12 5:06 ` Shakeel Butt
2023-05-12 5:51 ` Zhang, Cathy
2023-05-12 17:17 ` Shakeel Butt
2023-05-15 3:46 ` Zhang, Cathy
2023-05-15 4:13 ` Shakeel Butt
2023-05-15 6:27 ` Zhang, Cathy
2023-05-15 19:50 ` Shakeel Butt
2023-05-16 5:46 ` Oliver Sang
2023-05-17 16:24 ` Shakeel Butt
2023-05-17 16:33 ` Eric Dumazet
2023-05-17 17:04 ` Shakeel Butt
2023-07-28 2:26 ` Zhang, Cathy
2023-05-19 2:53 ` Oliver Sang
2023-05-31 8:46 ` Oliver Sang
2023-05-09 17:58 ` Shakeel Butt
2023-05-10 7:21 ` Zhang, Cathy
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='CALvZod7Y+SxiopRBXOf1HoDKO=Xh8CNPfgz3Etd4XOq5BPc5Ag@mail.gmail.com' \
--to=shakeelb@google.com \
--cc=cathy.zhang@intel.com \
--cc=cgroups@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=davem@davemloft.net \
--cc=edumazet@google.com \
--cc=eric.dumazet@gmail.com \
--cc=jesse.brandeburg@intel.com \
--cc=kuba@kernel.org \
--cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
--cc=lizhen.you@intel.com \
--cc=netdev@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=pabeni@redhat.com \
--cc=suresh.srinivas@intel.com \
--cc=tim.c.chen@intel.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