From: Roman Gushchin <roman.gushchin@linux.dev>
To: Shakeel Butt <shakeel.butt@linux.dev>
Cc: Vlastimil Babka <vbabka@suse.cz>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
Johannes Weiner <hannes@cmpxchg.org>,
Michal Hocko <mhocko@kernel.org>,
Muchun Song <muchun.song@linux.dev>,
David Rientjes <rientjes@google.com>,
Hyeonggon Yoo <42.hyeyoo@gmail.com>,
Eric Dumazet <edumazet@google.com>,
"David S . Miller" <davem@davemloft.net>,
Jakub Kicinski <kuba@kernel.org>, Paolo Abeni <pabeni@redhat.com>,
linux-mm@kvack.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
Meta kernel team <kernel-team@meta.com>,
cgroups@vger.kernel.org, netdev@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] memcg: add charging of already allocated slab objects
Date: Thu, 29 Aug 2024 16:20:28 +0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <ZtCfzHNUSVjGsXGS@google.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <mvxyevmpzwatlt7z4fdjakvuixmp5hcqmvo3467kzlgp2xkbgf@xumnm2y6xxrg>
On Thu, Aug 29, 2024 at 09:10:53AM -0700, Shakeel Butt wrote:
> On Thu, Aug 29, 2024 at 11:42:10AM GMT, Vlastimil Babka wrote:
> > On 8/28/24 01:52, Shakeel Butt wrote:
> > > At the moment, the slab objects are charged to the memcg at the
> > > allocation time. However there are cases where slab objects are
> > > allocated at the time where the right target memcg to charge it to is
> > > not known. One such case is the network sockets for the incoming
> > > connection which are allocated in the softirq context.
> > >
> > > Couple hundred thousand connections are very normal on large loaded
> > > server and almost all of those sockets underlying those connections get
> > > allocated in the softirq context and thus not charged to any memcg.
> > > However later at the accept() time we know the right target memcg to
> > > charge. Let's add new API to charge already allocated objects, so we can
> > > have better accounting of the memory usage.
> > >
> > > To measure the performance impact of this change, tcp_crr is used from
> > > the neper [1] performance suite. Basically it is a network ping pong
> > > test with new connection for each ping pong.
> > >
> > > The server and the client are run inside 3 level of cgroup hierarchy
> > > using the following commands:
> > >
> > > Server:
> > > $ tcp_crr -6
> > >
> > > Client:
> > > $ tcp_crr -6 -c -H ${server_ip}
> > >
> > > If the client and server run on different machines with 50 GBPS NIC,
> > > there is no visible impact of the change.
> > >
> > > For the same machine experiment with v6.11-rc5 as base.
> > >
> > > base (throughput) with-patch
> > > tcp_crr 14545 (+- 80) 14463 (+- 56)
> > >
> > > It seems like the performance impact is within the noise.
> > >
> > > Link: https://github.com/google/neper [1]
> > > Signed-off-by: Shakeel Butt <shakeel.butt@linux.dev>
> > > ---
> > > v1: https://lore.kernel.org/all/20240826232908.4076417-1-shakeel.butt@linux.dev/
> > > Changes since v1:
> > > - Correctly handle large allocations which bypass slab
> > > - Rearrange code to avoid compilation errors for !CONFIG_MEMCG builds
> > >
> > > RFC: https://lore.kernel.org/all/20240824010139.1293051-1-shakeel.butt@linux.dev/
> > > Changes since the RFC:
> > > - Added check for already charged slab objects.
> > > - Added performance results from neper's tcp_crr
> > >
> > > include/linux/slab.h | 1 +
> > > mm/slub.c | 51 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
> > > net/ipv4/inet_connection_sock.c | 5 ++--
> > > 3 files changed, 55 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
> >
> > I can take the v3 in slab tree, if net people ack?
>
> Thanks.
>
> >
> > BTW, will this be also useful for Linus's idea of charging struct files only
> > after they exist? But IIRC there was supposed to be also a part where we
> > have a way to quickly determine if we're not over limit (while allowing some
> > overcharge to make it quicker).
It should work and speed up the case when we can drop the object before charging.
I'd suggest to implement it in a separate change though.
Thanks!
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2024-08-29 16:20 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 17+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2024-08-27 23:52 Shakeel Butt
2024-08-28 0:34 ` Yosry Ahmed
2024-08-28 19:14 ` Shakeel Butt
2024-08-28 19:42 ` Yosry Ahmed
2024-08-28 20:16 ` Shakeel Butt
2024-08-28 22:10 ` Yosry Ahmed
2024-08-28 23:25 ` Yosry Ahmed
2024-08-29 0:20 ` Shakeel Butt
2024-08-29 0:49 ` Yosry Ahmed
2024-08-29 8:42 ` Vlastimil Babka
2024-08-29 15:50 ` Shakeel Butt
2024-08-29 18:28 ` Yosry Ahmed
2024-08-29 9:42 ` Vlastimil Babka
2024-08-29 16:10 ` Shakeel Butt
2024-08-29 16:20 ` Roman Gushchin [this message]
2024-08-29 17:39 ` Vlastimil Babka
2024-08-30 20:34 ` Roman Gushchin
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=ZtCfzHNUSVjGsXGS@google.com \
--to=roman.gushchin@linux.dev \
--cc=42.hyeyoo@gmail.com \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=cgroups@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=davem@davemloft.net \
--cc=edumazet@google.com \
--cc=hannes@cmpxchg.org \
--cc=kernel-team@meta.com \
--cc=kuba@kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
--cc=mhocko@kernel.org \
--cc=muchun.song@linux.dev \
--cc=netdev@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=pabeni@redhat.com \
--cc=rientjes@google.com \
--cc=shakeel.butt@linux.dev \
--cc=vbabka@suse.cz \
/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