lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2009]   [May]   [12]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: [PATCH 2/3] fix swap cache account leak at swapin-readahead
On Tue, May 12, 2009 at 10:46:03AM +0900, KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki wrote:
> From: KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki <kamezawa.hiroyu@jp.fujitsu.com>
>
> In general, Linux's swp_entry handling is done by combination of lazy techniques
> and global LRU. It works well but when we use mem+swap controller, some more
> strict control is appropriate. Otherwise, swp_entry used by a cgroup will be
> never freed until global LRU works. In a system where memcg is well-configured,
> global LRU doesn't work frequently.
>
> Example) Assume swapin-readahead.
> CPU0 CPU1
> zap_pte() read_swap_cache_async()
> swap_duplicate().
> swap_entry_free() = 1
> find_get_page()=> NULL.
> add_to_swap_cache().
> issue swap I/O.
>
> There are many patterns of this kind of race (but no problems).
>
> free_swap_and_cache() is called for freeing swp_entry. But it is a best-effort
> function. If the swp_entry/page seems busy, swp_entry is not freed.
> This is not a problem because global-LRU will find SwapCache at page reclaim.
>
> If memcg is used, on the other hand, global LRU may not work. Then, above
> unused SwapCache will not be freed.
> (unmapped SwapCache occupy swp_entry but never be freed if not on memcg's LRU)
>
> So, even if there are no tasks in a cgroup, swp_entry usage still remains.
> In bad case, OOM by mem+swap controller is triggered by this "leak" of
> swp_entry as Nishimura reported.
>
> Considering this issue, swapin-readahead itself is not very good for memcg.
> It read swap cache which will not be used. (and _unused_ swapcache will
> not be accounted.) Even if we account swap cache at add_to_swap_cache(),
> we need to account page to several _unrelated_ memcg. This is bad.
>
> This patch tries to fix racy case of free_swap_and_cache() and page status.
>
> After this patch applied, following test works well.
>
> # echo 1-2M > ../memory.limit_in_bytes
> # run tasks under memcg.
> # kill all tasks and make memory.tasks empty
> # check memory.memsw.usage_in_bytes == memory.usage_in_bytes and
> there is no _used_ swp_entry.
>
> What this patch does is
> - avoid swapin-readahead when memcg is activated.
>
> Changelog: v6 -> v7
> - just handle races in readahead.
> - races in writeback is handled in the next patch.
>
> Changelog: v5 -> v6
> - works only when memcg is activated.
> - check after I/O works only after writeback.
> - avoid swapin-readahead when memcg is activated.
> - fixed page refcnt issue.
> Changelog: v4->v5
> - completely new design.
>
> Reported-by: Daisuke Nishimura <nishimura@mxp.nes.nec.co.jp>
> Signed-off-by: KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki <kamezawa.hiroyu@jp.fujitsu.com>
> ---
> mm/swap_state.c | 20 +++++++++++++++++---
> 1 file changed, 17 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
>
> Index: mmotm-2.6.30-May07/mm/swap_state.c
> ===================================================================
> --- mmotm-2.6.30-May07.orig/mm/swap_state.c
> +++ mmotm-2.6.30-May07/mm/swap_state.c
> @@ -349,9 +349,9 @@ struct page *read_swap_cache_async(swp_e
> struct page *swapin_readahead(swp_entry_t entry, gfp_t gfp_mask,
> struct vm_area_struct *vma, unsigned long addr)
> {
> - int nr_pages;
> + int nr_pages = 1;
> struct page *page;
> - unsigned long offset;
> + unsigned long offset = 0;
> unsigned long end_offset;
>
> /*
> @@ -360,8 +360,22 @@ struct page *swapin_readahead(swp_entry_
> * No, it's very unlikely that swap layout would follow vma layout,
> * more likely that neighbouring swap pages came from the same node:
> * so use the same "addr" to choose the same node for each swap read.
> + *
> + * But, when memcg is used, swapin readahead give us some bad
> + * effects. There are 2 big problems in general.
> + * 1. Swapin readahead tend to use/read _not required_ memory.
> + * And _not required_ memory is only freed by global LRU.
> + * 2. We can't charge pages for swap-cache readahead because
> + * we should avoid account memory in a cgroup which a
> + * thread call this function is not related to.
> + * And swapin-readahead have racy condition with
> + * free_swap_and_cache(). This also annoys memcg.
> + * Then, if memcg is really used, we avoid readahead.
> */
> - nr_pages = valid_swaphandles(entry, &offset);
> +
> + if (!mem_cgroup_activated())
> + nr_pages = valid_swaphandles(entry, &offset);
> +
> for (end_offset = offset + nr_pages; offset < end_offset; offset++) {
> /* Ok, do the async read-ahead now */
> page = read_swap_cache_async(swp_entry(swp_type(entry), offset),

Having nr_pages set to 1 and offset to zero will actually enter hat
loop and try to read a swap slot at offset zero, including a
superfluous page allocation, just to fail at the swap_duplicate()
(swap slot 0 is swap header -> SWAP_MAP_BAD).

How about:

if (mem_cgroup_activated())
goto pivot;
nr_pages = valid_swaphandles(...);
for (readahead loop)
...
pivot:
return read_swap_cache_async();
That will also save you the runtime initialization of nr_pages and
offset completely when the cgroup is active. And you'll have only one
branch and no second one for offset < end_offset in the loop. And the
lru draining, but I'm not sure about that. I think it's not needed.

Hannes


\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2009-05-12 13:29    [W:0.142 / U:0.328 seconds]
©2003-2014 Jasper Spaans. Advertise on this site