From: Shakeel Butt <shakeel.butt@linux.dev>
To: Roman Gushchin <roman.gushchin@linux.dev>
Cc: bpf@vger.kernel.org, linux-mm@kvack.org,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, JP Kobryn <inwardvessel@gmail.com>,
Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org>,
Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net>,
Michal Hocko <mhocko@kernel.org>,
Johannes Weiner <hannes@cmpxchg.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH bpf-next v1 3/6] mm: introduce bpf_get_root_mem_cgroup() BPF kfunc
Date: Fri, 19 Dec 2025 14:10:23 -0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <vnlncxcamfe4z66bd6muhljsf7z6i6lizibo4wpaxfs5d45et5@f73plchvytgy> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20251219015750.23732-4-roman.gushchin@linux.dev>
On Thu, Dec 18, 2025 at 05:57:47PM -0800, Roman Gushchin wrote:
> Introduce a BPF kfunc to get a trusted pointer to the root memory
> cgroup. It's very handy to traverse the full memcg tree, e.g.
> for handling a system-wide OOM.
>
> It's possible to obtain this pointer by traversing the memcg tree
> up from any known memcg, but it's sub-optimal and makes BPF programs
> more complex and less efficient.
>
> bpf_get_root_mem_cgroup() has a KF_ACQUIRE | KF_RET_NULL semantics,
> however in reality it's not necessarily
necessary*
> to bump the corresponding
> reference counter - root memory cgroup is immortal, reference counting
> is skipped, see css_get(). Once set, root_mem_cgroup is always a valid
> memcg pointer. It's safe to call bpf_put_mem_cgroup() for the pointer
> obtained with bpf_get_root_mem_cgroup(), it's effectively a no-op.
>
> Signed-off-by: Roman Gushchin <roman.gushchin@linux.dev>
> ---
> mm/bpf_memcontrol.c | 15 +++++++++++++++
> 1 file changed, 15 insertions(+)
>
> diff --git a/mm/bpf_memcontrol.c b/mm/bpf_memcontrol.c
> index 8aa842b56817..6d0d73bf0dd1 100644
> --- a/mm/bpf_memcontrol.c
> +++ b/mm/bpf_memcontrol.c
> @@ -10,6 +10,20 @@
>
> __bpf_kfunc_start_defs();
>
> +/**
> + * bpf_get_root_mem_cgroup - Returns a pointer to the root memory cgroup
> + *
> + * The function has KF_ACQUIRE semantics, even though the root memory
> + * cgroup is never destroyed after being created and doesn't require
> + * reference counting. And it's perfectly safe to pass it to
> + * bpf_put_mem_cgroup()
> + */
> +__bpf_kfunc struct mem_cgroup *bpf_get_root_mem_cgroup(void)
> +{
> + /* css_get() is not needed */
> + return root_mem_cgroup;
I think we need mem_cgroup_disabled() check here as well because I think
root_mem_cgroup can get allocated before memcg can be disabled due to
boot param.
> +}
> +
> /**
> * bpf_get_mem_cgroup - Get a reference to a memory cgroup
> * @css: pointer to the css structure
> @@ -64,6 +78,7 @@ __bpf_kfunc void bpf_put_mem_cgroup(struct mem_cgroup *memcg)
> __bpf_kfunc_end_defs();
>
> BTF_KFUNCS_START(bpf_memcontrol_kfuncs)
> +BTF_ID_FLAGS(func, bpf_get_root_mem_cgroup, KF_ACQUIRE | KF_RET_NULL)
> BTF_ID_FLAGS(func, bpf_get_mem_cgroup, KF_TRUSTED_ARGS | KF_ACQUIRE | KF_RET_NULL | KF_RCU)
> BTF_ID_FLAGS(func, bpf_put_mem_cgroup, KF_TRUSTED_ARGS | KF_RELEASE)
>
> --
> 2.52.0
>
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2025-12-19 22:10 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 19+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2025-12-19 1:57 [PATCH bpf-next v1 0/6] mm: bpf kfuncs to access memcg data Roman Gushchin
2025-12-19 1:57 ` [PATCH bpf-next v1 1/6] mm: declare memcg_page_state_output() in memcontrol.h Roman Gushchin
2025-12-19 21:35 ` Shakeel Butt
2025-12-19 1:57 ` [PATCH bpf-next v1 2/6] mm: introduce BPF kfuncs to deal with memcg pointers Roman Gushchin
2025-12-19 21:51 ` Shakeel Butt
2025-12-19 22:42 ` Roman Gushchin
2025-12-19 1:57 ` [PATCH bpf-next v1 3/6] mm: introduce bpf_get_root_mem_cgroup() BPF kfunc Roman Gushchin
2025-12-19 22:10 ` Shakeel Butt [this message]
2025-12-19 1:57 ` [PATCH bpf-next v1 4/6] mm: introduce BPF kfuncs to access memcg statistics and events Roman Gushchin
2025-12-19 2:15 ` bot+bpf-ci
2025-12-19 2:49 ` Roman Gushchin
2025-12-19 22:45 ` Shakeel Butt
2025-12-19 1:57 ` [PATCH bpf-next v1 5/6] mm: introduce BPF kfunc to access memory events Roman Gushchin
2025-12-19 2:21 ` bot+bpf-ci
2025-12-19 2:51 ` Roman Gushchin
2025-12-19 22:46 ` Shakeel Butt
2025-12-19 1:57 ` [PATCH bpf-next v1 6/6] bpf: selftests: selftests for memcg stat kfuncs Roman Gushchin
2025-12-19 23:07 ` Shakeel Butt
2025-12-20 3:20 ` 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=vnlncxcamfe4z66bd6muhljsf7z6i6lizibo4wpaxfs5d45et5@f73plchvytgy \
--to=shakeel.butt@linux.dev \
--cc=ast@kernel.org \
--cc=bpf@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=daniel@iogearbox.net \
--cc=hannes@cmpxchg.org \
--cc=inwardvessel@gmail.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
--cc=mhocko@kernel.org \
--cc=roman.gushchin@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