linux-mm.kvack.org archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Qi Zheng <zhengqi.arch@bytedance.com>
To: Kirill Tkhai <tkhai@ya.ru>
Cc: sultan@kerneltoast.com, dave@stgolabs.net,
	penguin-kernel@I-love.SAKURA.ne.jp, paulmck@kernel.org,
	linux-mm@kvack.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
	Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
	Johannes Weiner <hannes@cmpxchg.org>,
	Shakeel Butt <shakeelb@google.com>,
	Michal Hocko <mhocko@kernel.org>,
	Roman Gushchin <roman.gushchin@linux.dev>,
	Muchun Song <muchun.song@linux.dev>,
	David Hildenbrand <david@redhat.com>,
	Yang Shi <shy828301@gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/5] mm: vmscan: make memcg slab shrink lockless
Date: Thu, 23 Feb 2023 12:37:19 +0800	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <ee7852cc-e37e-5602-7729-5bb1500a1f2a@bytedance.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <23fde2e7-e9e2-2b0d-dfd8-1a654bc5503c@ya.ru>



On 2023/2/23 04:05, Kirill Tkhai wrote:
> On 22.02.2023 11:21, Qi Zheng wrote:
>>
>>
>> On 2023/2/22 16:16, Qi Zheng wrote:
>>> Hi Kirill,
>>>
>>> On 2023/2/22 05:43, Kirill Tkhai wrote:
>>>> On 20.02.2023 12:16, Qi Zheng wrote:
>>>>> Like global slab shrink, since commit 1cd0bd06093c<...>
>>>>>    static bool cgroup_reclaim(struct scan_control *sc)
>>>>> @@ -891,15 +905,14 @@ static unsigned long shrink_slab_memcg(gfp_t gfp_mask, int nid,
>>>>>    {
>>>>>        struct shrinker_info *info;
>>>>>        unsigned long ret, freed = 0;
>>>>> +    int srcu_idx;
>>>>>        int i;
>>>>>        if (!mem_cgroup_online(memcg))
>>>>>            return 0;
>>>>> -    if (!down_read_trylock(&shrinker_rwsem))
>>>>> -        return 0;
>>>>> -
>>>>> -    info = shrinker_info_protected(memcg, nid);
>>>>> +    srcu_idx = srcu_read_lock(&shrinker_srcu);
>>>>> +    info = shrinker_info_srcu(memcg, nid);
>>>>>        if (unlikely(!info))
>>>>>            goto unlock;
>>>>
>>>> There is shrinker_nr_max dereference under this hunk. It's not in the patch:
>>>>
>>>>           for_each_set_bit(i, info->map, shrinker_nr_max) {
>>>>
>>>> Since shrinker_nr_max may grow in parallel, this leads to access beyond allocated memory :(
>>>
>>> Oh, indeed.
>>>
>>>>
>>>> It looks like we should save size of info->map as a new member of struct shrinker_info.
>>>
>>> Agree, then we only traverse info->map_size each time. Like below:
>>>
>>> diff --git a/include/linux/memcontrol.h b/include/linux/memcontrol.h
>>> index b6eda2ab205d..f1b5d2803007 100644
>>> --- a/include/linux/memcontrol.h
>>> +++ b/include/linux/memcontrol.h
>>> @@ -97,6 +97,7 @@ struct shrinker_info {
>>>           struct rcu_head rcu;
>>>           atomic_long_t *nr_deferred;
>>>           unsigned long *map;
>>> +       int map_size;
> 
> Sure, like this. The only thing (after rethinking) I want to say is that despite "size" was
> may suggestion, now it makes me think that name "size" is about size in bytes.
> 
> Possible, something like map_nr_max would be better here.

Agree. Will change to it.

> 
>>>    };
>>>
>>>    struct lruvec_stats_percpu {
>>> diff --git a/mm/vmscan.c b/mm/vmscan.c
>>> index f94bfe540675..dd07eb107915 100644
>>> --- a/mm/vmscan.c
>>> +++ b/mm/vmscan.c
>>> @@ -239,14 +239,20 @@ static void free_shrinker_info_rcu(struct rcu_head *head)
>>>           kvfree(container_of(head, struct shrinker_info, rcu));
>>>    }
>>>
>>> -static int expand_one_shrinker_info(struct mem_cgroup *memcg,
>>> -                                   int map_size, int defer_size,
>>> -                                   int old_map_size, int old_defer_size)
>>> +static int expand_one_shrinker_info(struct mem_cgroup *memcg, int new_nr_max,
>>> +                                   int old_nr_max)
>>>    {
>>> +       int map_size, defer_size, old_map_size, old_defer_size;
>>>           struct shrinker_info *new, *old;
>>>           struct mem_cgroup_per_node *pn;
>>>           int nid;
>>> -       int size = map_size + defer_size;
>>> +       int size;
>>> +
>>> +       map_size = shrinker_map_size(new_nr_max);
>>> +       defer_size = shrinker_defer_size(new_nr_max);
>>> +       old_map_size = shrinker_map_size(shrinker_nr_max);
>>> +       old_defer_size = shrinker_defer_size(shrinker_nr_max);
>>
>> Perhaps these should still be calculated outside the loop as before.
> 
> Yeah, for me it's also better.
>   
>>> +       size = map_size + defer_size;
>>>
>>>           for_each_node(nid) {
>>>                   pn = memcg->nodeinfo[nid];
>>> @@ -261,6 +267,7 @@ static int expand_one_shrinker_info(struct mem_cgroup *memcg,
>>>
>>>                   new->nr_deferred = (atomic_long_t *)(new + 1);
>>>                   new->map = (void *)new->nr_deferred + defer_size;
>>> +               new->map_size = new_nr_max;
>>>
>>>                   /* map: set all old bits, clear all new bits */
>>>                   memset(new->map, (int)0xff, old_map_size);
>>> @@ -310,6 +317,7 @@ int alloc_shrinker_info(struct mem_cgroup *memcg)
>>>                   }
>>>                   info->nr_deferred = (atomic_long_t *)(info + 1);
>>>                   info->map = (void *)info->nr_deferred + defer_size;
>>> +               info->map_size = shrinker_nr_max;
>>>                   rcu_assign_pointer(memcg->nodeinfo[nid]->shrinker_info, info);
>>>           }
>>>           mutex_unlock(&shrinker_mutex);
>>> @@ -327,8 +335,6 @@ static int expand_shrinker_info(int new_id)
>>>    {
>>>           int ret = 0;
>>>           int new_nr_max = new_id + 1;
>>> -       int map_size, defer_size = 0;
>>> -       int old_map_size, old_defer_size = 0;
>>>           struct mem_cgroup *memcg;
>>>
>>>           if (!need_expand(new_nr_max))
>>> @@ -339,15 +345,9 @@ static int expand_shrinker_info(int new_id)
>>>
>>>           lockdep_assert_held(&shrinker_mutex);
>>>
>>> -       map_size = shrinker_map_size(new_nr_max);
>>> -       defer_size = shrinker_defer_size(new_nr_max);
>>> -       old_map_size = shrinker_map_size(shrinker_nr_max);
>>> -       old_defer_size = shrinker_defer_size(shrinker_nr_max);
>>> -
>>>           memcg = mem_cgroup_iter(NULL, NULL, NULL);
>>>           do {
>>> -               ret = expand_one_shrinker_info(memcg, map_size, defer_size,
>>> -                                              old_map_size, old_defer_size);
>>> +               ret = expand_one_shrinker_info(memcg, new_nr_max, shrinker_nr_max);
>>>                   if (ret) {
>>>                           mem_cgroup_iter_break(NULL, memcg);
>>>                           goto out;
>>> @@ -912,7 +912,7 @@ static unsigned long shrink_slab_memcg(gfp_t gfp_mask, int nid,
>>>           if (unlikely(!info))
>>>                   goto unlock;
>>>
>>> -       for_each_set_bit(i, info->map, shrinker_nr_max) {
>>> +       for_each_set_bit(i, info->map, info->map_size) {
>>>                   struct shrink_control sc = {
>>>                           .gfp_mask = gfp_mask,
>>>                           .nid = nid,
>>>
>>> I will send the v2.
>>>
>>> Thanks,
>>> Qi
>>>
>>>>
>>>>> @@ -949,14 +962,9 @@ static unsigned long shrink_slab_memcg(gfp_t gfp_mask, int nid,
>>>>>                    set_shrinker_bit(memcg, nid, i);
>>>>>            }
>>>>>            freed += ret;
>>>>> -
>>>>> -        if (rwsem_is_contended(&shrinker_rwsem)) {
>>>>> -            freed = freed ? : 1;
>>>>> -            break;
>>>>> -        }
>>>>>        }
>>>>>    unlock:
>>>>> -    up_read(&shrinker_rwsem);
>>>>> +    srcu_read_unlock(&shrinker_srcu, srcu_idx);
>>>>>        return freed;
>>>>>    }
>>>>>    #else /* CONFIG_MEMCG */
>>>>
>>>
>>
> 

-- 
Thanks,
Qi


  reply	other threads:[~2023-02-23  4:37 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 16+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2023-02-20  9:16 [PATCH 0/5] make " Qi Zheng
2023-02-20  9:16 ` [PATCH 1/5] mm: vmscan: make global " Qi Zheng
2023-02-20  9:16 ` [PATCH 2/5] mm: vmscan: make memcg " Qi Zheng
2023-02-21 21:28   ` Kirill Tkhai
2023-02-22  7:32     ` Qi Zheng
2023-02-22 19:58       ` Kirill Tkhai
2023-02-23  4:36         ` Qi Zheng
2023-02-21 21:43   ` Kirill Tkhai
2023-02-22  8:16     ` Qi Zheng
2023-02-22  8:21       ` Qi Zheng
2023-02-22 20:05         ` Kirill Tkhai
2023-02-23  4:37           ` Qi Zheng [this message]
2023-02-20  9:16 ` [PATCH 3/5] mm: shrinkers: make count and scan in shrinker debugfs lockless Qi Zheng
2023-02-20 13:22   ` kernel test robot
2023-02-20  9:16 ` [PATCH 4/5] mm: vmscan: remove shrinker_rwsem from synchronize_shrinkers() Qi Zheng
2023-02-20  9:16 ` [PATCH 5/5] mm: shrinkers: convert shrinker_rwsem to mutex Qi Zheng

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=ee7852cc-e37e-5602-7729-5bb1500a1f2a@bytedance.com \
    --to=zhengqi.arch@bytedance.com \
    --cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
    --cc=dave@stgolabs.net \
    --cc=david@redhat.com \
    --cc=hannes@cmpxchg.org \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
    --cc=mhocko@kernel.org \
    --cc=muchun.song@linux.dev \
    --cc=paulmck@kernel.org \
    --cc=penguin-kernel@I-love.SAKURA.ne.jp \
    --cc=roman.gushchin@linux.dev \
    --cc=shakeelb@google.com \
    --cc=shy828301@gmail.com \
    --cc=sultan@kerneltoast.com \
    --cc=tkhai@ya.ru \
    /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