linux-mm.kvack.org archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Vlastimil Babka <vbabka@suse.cz>
To: Shakeel Butt <shakeel.butt@linux.dev>,
	Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>
Cc: Johannes Weiner <hannes@cmpxchg.org>,
	Michal Hocko <mhocko@kernel.org>,
	Roman Gushchin <roman.gushchin@linux.dev>,
	Muchun Song <muchun.song@linux.dev>,
	Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org>,
	Sebastian Andrzej Siewior <bigeasy@linutronix.de>,
	Harry Yoo <harry.yoo@oracle.com>,
	Yosry Ahmed <yosry.ahmed@linux.dev>,
	bpf@vger.kernel.org, linux-mm@kvack.org, cgroups@vger.kernel.org,
	linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
	Meta kernel team <kernel-team@meta.com>,
	Mathieu Desnoyers <mathieu.desnoyers@efficios.com>
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH 1/7] memcg: memcg_rstat_updated re-entrant safe against irqs
Date: Tue, 13 May 2025 12:22:28 +0200	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <fbcc9892-838c-4156-8ece-94793c00a1c6@suse.cz> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20250513031316.2147548-2-shakeel.butt@linux.dev>

On 5/13/25 05:13, Shakeel Butt wrote:
> The function memcg_rstat_updated() is used to track the memcg stats
> updates for optimizing the flushes. At the moment, it is not re-entrant
> safe and the callers disabled irqs before calling. However to achieve
> the goal of updating memcg stats without irqs, memcg_rstat_updated()
> needs to be re-entrant safe against irqs.
> 
> This patch makes memcg_rstat_updated() re-entrant safe against irqs.
> However it is using atomic_* ops which on x86, adds lock prefix to the
> instructions. Since this is per-cpu data, the this_cpu_* ops are
> preferred. However the percpu pointer is stored in struct mem_cgroup and
> doing the upward traversal through struct mem_cgroup may cause two cache
> misses as compared to traversing through struct memcg_vmstats_percpu
> pointer.
> 
> NOTE: explore if there is atomic_* ops alternative without lock prefix.

local_t might be what you want here
https://docs.kernel.org/core-api/local_ops.html

Or maybe just add __percpu to parent like this?

struct memcg_vmstats_percpu {
...
        struct memcg_vmstats_percpu __percpu *parent;
...
}

Yes, it means on each cpu's struct memcg_vmstats_percpu instance there will
be actually the same value stored (the percpu offset) instead of the
cpu-specific parent pointer, which might seem wasteful. But AFAIK this_cpu_*
is optimized enough thanks to the segment register usage, that it doesn't
matter? It shouldn't cause any extra cache miss you worry about, IIUC?

With that I think you could refactor that code to use e.g.
this_cpu_add_return() and this_cpu_xchg() on the stats_updates and obtain
the parent "pointer" in a way that's also compatible with these operations.

That is unless we want also nmi safety, then we're back to the issue of the
previous series...

> Signed-off-by: Shakeel Butt <shakeel.butt@linux.dev>
> ---
>  mm/memcontrol.c | 21 +++++++++++++--------
>  1 file changed, 13 insertions(+), 8 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/mm/memcontrol.c b/mm/memcontrol.c
> index 6cfa3550f300..2c4c095bf26c 100644
> --- a/mm/memcontrol.c
> +++ b/mm/memcontrol.c
> @@ -503,7 +503,7 @@ static inline int memcg_events_index(enum vm_event_item idx)
>  
>  struct memcg_vmstats_percpu {
>  	/* Stats updates since the last flush */
> -	unsigned int			stats_updates;
> +	atomic_t			stats_updates;
>  
>  	/* Cached pointers for fast iteration in memcg_rstat_updated() */
>  	struct memcg_vmstats_percpu	*parent;
> @@ -590,12 +590,15 @@ static bool memcg_vmstats_needs_flush(struct memcg_vmstats *vmstats)
>  static inline void memcg_rstat_updated(struct mem_cgroup *memcg, int val)
>  {
>  	struct memcg_vmstats_percpu *statc;
> -	int cpu = smp_processor_id();
> -	unsigned int stats_updates;
> +	int cpu;
> +	int stats_updates;
>  
>  	if (!val)
>  		return;
>  
> +	/* Don't assume callers have preemption disabled. */
> +	cpu = get_cpu();
> +
>  	cgroup_rstat_updated(memcg->css.cgroup, cpu);
>  	statc = this_cpu_ptr(memcg->vmstats_percpu);
>  	for (; statc; statc = statc->parent) {
> @@ -607,14 +610,16 @@ static inline void memcg_rstat_updated(struct mem_cgroup *memcg, int val)
>  		if (memcg_vmstats_needs_flush(statc->vmstats))
>  			break;
>  
> -		stats_updates = READ_ONCE(statc->stats_updates) + abs(val);
> -		WRITE_ONCE(statc->stats_updates, stats_updates);
> +		stats_updates = atomic_add_return(abs(val), &statc->stats_updates);
>  		if (stats_updates < MEMCG_CHARGE_BATCH)
>  			continue;
>  
> -		atomic64_add(stats_updates, &statc->vmstats->stats_updates);
> -		WRITE_ONCE(statc->stats_updates, 0);
> +		stats_updates = atomic_xchg(&statc->stats_updates, 0);
> +		if (stats_updates)
> +			atomic64_add(stats_updates,
> +				     &statc->vmstats->stats_updates);
>  	}
> +	put_cpu();
>  }
>  
>  static void __mem_cgroup_flush_stats(struct mem_cgroup *memcg, bool force)
> @@ -4155,7 +4160,7 @@ static void mem_cgroup_css_rstat_flush(struct cgroup_subsys_state *css, int cpu)
>  		mem_cgroup_stat_aggregate(&ac);
>  
>  	}
> -	WRITE_ONCE(statc->stats_updates, 0);
> +	atomic_set(&statc->stats_updates, 0);
>  	/* We are in a per-cpu loop here, only do the atomic write once */
>  	if (atomic64_read(&memcg->vmstats->stats_updates))
>  		atomic64_set(&memcg->vmstats->stats_updates, 0);



  reply	other threads:[~2025-05-13 10:22 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 16+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2025-05-13  3:13 [RFC PATCH 0/7] memcg: make memcg stats irq safe Shakeel Butt
2025-05-13  3:13 ` [RFC PATCH 1/7] memcg: memcg_rstat_updated re-entrant safe against irqs Shakeel Butt
2025-05-13 10:22   ` Vlastimil Babka [this message]
2025-05-13 18:09     ` Shakeel Butt
2025-05-13  3:13 ` [RFC PATCH 2/7] memcg: move preempt disable to callers of memcg_rstat_updated Shakeel Butt
2025-05-13 10:34   ` Vlastimil Babka
2025-05-13  3:13 ` [RFC PATCH 3/7] memcg: make mod_memcg_state re-entrant safe against irqs Shakeel Butt
2025-05-13 10:38   ` Vlastimil Babka
2025-05-13  3:13 ` [RFC PATCH 4/7] memcg: make count_memcg_events " Shakeel Butt
2025-05-13 10:39   ` Vlastimil Babka
2025-05-13  3:13 ` [RFC PATCH 5/7] memcg: make __mod_memcg_lruvec_state " Shakeel Butt
2025-05-13 10:40   ` Vlastimil Babka
2025-05-13  3:13 ` [RFC PATCH 6/7] memcg: objcg stock trylock without irq disabling Shakeel Butt
2025-05-13 13:05   ` Vlastimil Babka
2025-05-13  3:13 ` [RFC PATCH 7/7] memcg: no stock lock for cpu hot-unplug Shakeel Butt
2025-05-13 13:10   ` Vlastimil Babka

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=fbcc9892-838c-4156-8ece-94793c00a1c6@suse.cz \
    --to=vbabka@suse.cz \
    --cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
    --cc=ast@kernel.org \
    --cc=bigeasy@linutronix.de \
    --cc=bpf@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=cgroups@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=hannes@cmpxchg.org \
    --cc=harry.yoo@oracle.com \
    --cc=kernel-team@meta.com \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
    --cc=mathieu.desnoyers@efficios.com \
    --cc=mhocko@kernel.org \
    --cc=muchun.song@linux.dev \
    --cc=roman.gushchin@linux.dev \
    --cc=shakeel.butt@linux.dev \
    --cc=yosry.ahmed@linux.dev \
    /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