From: Michal Hocko <mhocko@suse.com>
To: hui.zhu@linux.dev
Cc: Roman Gushchin <roman.gushchin@linux.dev>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
Johannes Weiner <hannes@cmpxchg.org>,
Shakeel Butt <shakeel.butt@linux.dev>,
Muchun Song <muchun.song@linux.dev>,
Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org>,
Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net>,
Andrii Nakryiko <andrii@kernel.org>,
Martin KaFai Lau <martin.lau@linux.dev>,
Eduard Zingerman <eddyz87@gmail.com>, Song Liu <song@kernel.org>,
Yonghong Song <yonghong.song@linux.dev>,
John Fastabend <john.fastabend@gmail.com>,
KP Singh <kpsingh@kernel.org>,
Stanislav Fomichev <sdf@fomichev.me>, Hao Luo <haoluo@google.com>,
Jiri Olsa <jolsa@kernel.org>, Shuah Khan <shuah@kernel.org>,
Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>,
Miguel Ojeda <ojeda@kernel.org>,
Nathan Chancellor <nathan@kernel.org>,
Kees Cook <kees@kernel.org>, Tejun Heo <tj@kernel.org>,
Jeff Xu <jeffxu@chromium.org>,
mkoutny@suse.com, Jan Hendrik Farr <kernel@jfarr.cc>,
Christian Brauner <brauner@kernel.org>,
Randy Dunlap <rdunlap@infradead.org>,
Brian Gerst <brgerst@gmail.com>,
Masahiro Yamada <masahiroy@kernel.org>,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-mm@kvack.org,
cgroups@vger.kernel.org, bpf@vger.kernel.org,
linux-kselftest@vger.kernel.org, Hui Zhu <zhuhui@kylinos.cn>
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH 0/3] Memory Controller eBPF support
Date: Tue, 25 Nov 2025 13:12:58 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <aSWdSlhU3acQ9Rq1@tiehlicka> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <f5c4c443f8ba855d329a180a6816fc259eb8dfca@linux.dev>
On Fri 21-11-25 02:46:31, hui.zhu@linux.dev wrote:
> 2025年11月21日 03:20, "Michal Hocko" <mhocko@suse.com mailto:mhocko@suse.com?to=%22Michal%20Hocko%22%20%3Cmhocko%40suse.com%3E > 写到:
>
>
> >
> > On Thu 20-11-25 09:29:52, hui.zhu@linux.dev wrote:
> > [...]
> >
> > >
> > > I generally agree with an idea to use BPF for various memcg-related
> > > policies, but I'm not sure how specific callbacks can be used in
> > > practice.
> > >
> > > Hi Roman,
> > >
> > > Following are some ideas that can use ebpf memcg:
> > >
> > > Priority‑Based Reclaim and Limits in Multi‑Tenant Environments:
> > > On a single machine with multiple tenants / namespaces / containers,
> > > under memory pressure it’s hard to decide “who should be squeezed first”
> > > with static policies baked into the kernel.
> > > Assign a BPF profile to each tenant’s memcg:
> > > Under high global pressure, BPF can decide:
> > > Which memcgs’ memory.high should be raised (delaying reclaim),
> > > Which memcgs should be scanned and reclaimed more aggressively.
> > >
> > > Online Profiling / Diagnosing Memory Hotspots:
> > > A cgroup’s memory keeps growing, but without patching the kernel it’s
> > > difficult to obtain fine‑grained information.
> > > Attach BPF to the memcg charge/uncharge path:
> > > Record large allocations (greater than N KB) with call stacks and
> > > owning file/module, and send them to user space via a BPF ring buffer.
> > > Based on sampled data, generate:
> > > “Top N memory allocation stacks in this container over the last 10 minutes,”
> > > Reports of which objects / call paths are growing fastest.
> > > This makes it possible to pinpoint the root cause of host memory
> > > anomalies without changing application code, which is very useful
> > > in operations/ops scenarios.
> > >
> > > SLO‑Driven Auto Throttling / Scale‑In/Out Signals:
> > > Use eBPF to observe memory usage slope, frequent reclaim,
> > > or near‑OOM behavior within a memcg.
> > > When it decides “OOM is imminent,” instead of just killing/raising
> > > limits, it can emit a signal to a control‑plane component.
> > > For example, send an event to a user‑space agent to trigger
> > > automatic scaling, QPS adjustment, or throttling.
> > >
> > > Prevent a cgroup from launching a large‑scale fork+malloc attack:
> > > BPF checks per‑uid or per‑cgroup allocation behavior over the
> > > last few seconds during memcg charge.
> > >
> > AFAIU, these are just very high level ideas rather than anything you are
> > trying to target with this patch series, right?
> >
> > All I can see is that you add a reclaim hook but it is not really clear
> > to me how feasible it is to actually implement a real memory reclaim
> > strategy this way.
> >
> > In prinicipal I am not really opposed but the memory reclaim process is
> > rather involved process and I would really like to see there is
> > something real to be done without exporting all the MM code to BPF for
> > any practical use. Is there any POC out there?
>
> Hi Michal,
>
> I apologize for not delivering a more substantial POC.
>
> I was hesitant to add extensive eBPF support to memcg
> because I wasn't certain it aligned with the community's
> vision—and such support would require introducing many
> eBPF hooks into memcg.
>
> I will add more eBPF hook to memcg and provide a more
> meaningful POC in the next version.
Just to make sure we are on the same page. I am not suggesting we need
more of those hooks. I just want to see how many do we really need in
order to have a sensible eBPF driven reclaim policy which seems to be
the main usecase you want to puruse, right?
--
Michal Hocko
SUSE Labs
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2025-11-25 12:13 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 18+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2025-11-19 1:34 Hui Zhu
2025-11-19 1:34 ` [RFC PATCH 1/3] memcg: add eBPF struct ops support for memory charging Hui Zhu
2025-11-19 2:10 ` bot+bpf-ci
2025-11-19 16:07 ` Tejun Heo
2025-11-19 1:34 ` [RFC PATCH 2/3] selftests/bpf: add memcg eBPF struct ops test Hui Zhu
2025-11-19 2:19 ` bot+bpf-ci
2025-11-19 1:34 ` [RFC PATCH 3/3] samples/bpf: add example memcg eBPF program Hui Zhu
2025-11-19 2:19 ` bot+bpf-ci
2025-11-20 3:04 ` [RFC PATCH 0/3] Memory Controller eBPF support Roman Gushchin
2025-11-20 9:29 ` hui.zhu
2025-11-20 19:20 ` Michal Hocko
2025-11-21 2:46 ` hui.zhu
2025-11-25 12:12 ` Michal Hocko [this message]
2025-11-25 12:39 ` hui.zhu
2025-11-25 12:55 ` Michal Hocko
2025-11-26 3:05 ` hui.zhu
2025-11-26 16:01 ` Michal Hocko
2025-11-27 8:51 ` hui.zhu
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=aSWdSlhU3acQ9Rq1@tiehlicka \
--to=mhocko@suse.com \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=andrii@kernel.org \
--cc=ast@kernel.org \
--cc=bpf@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=brauner@kernel.org \
--cc=brgerst@gmail.com \
--cc=cgroups@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=daniel@iogearbox.net \
--cc=eddyz87@gmail.com \
--cc=hannes@cmpxchg.org \
--cc=haoluo@google.com \
--cc=hui.zhu@linux.dev \
--cc=jeffxu@chromium.org \
--cc=john.fastabend@gmail.com \
--cc=jolsa@kernel.org \
--cc=kees@kernel.org \
--cc=kernel@jfarr.cc \
--cc=kpsingh@kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kselftest@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
--cc=martin.lau@linux.dev \
--cc=masahiroy@kernel.org \
--cc=mkoutny@suse.com \
--cc=muchun.song@linux.dev \
--cc=nathan@kernel.org \
--cc=ojeda@kernel.org \
--cc=peterz@infradead.org \
--cc=rdunlap@infradead.org \
--cc=roman.gushchin@linux.dev \
--cc=sdf@fomichev.me \
--cc=shakeel.butt@linux.dev \
--cc=shuah@kernel.org \
--cc=song@kernel.org \
--cc=tj@kernel.org \
--cc=yonghong.song@linux.dev \
--cc=zhuhui@kylinos.cn \
/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