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);
next prev parent 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