lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2010]   [Apr]   [19]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: [RFC][BUGFIX][PATCH 2/2] memcg: fix file mapped underflow at migration (v3)
Thank you for explaining in detail.

On Mon, 19 Apr 2010 13:18:17 +0900, KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki <kamezawa.hiroyu@jp.fujitsu.com> wrote:
> On Mon, 19 Apr 2010 12:42:25 +0900
> Daisuke Nishimura <nishimura@mxp.nes.nec.co.jp> wrote:
>
> > Hmm, before going further, will you explain why we need a new PCG_MIGRATION flag ?
> > What's the problem of v2 ?
> >
>
> v2 can't handle migration-failure case of freed swapcache and the used page
> was swapped-out case. I think.
>
> All "page" in following is ANON.
>
>
> mem_cgroup_prepare_migration()
> charge against new page.
>
> try_to_unmap()
> -> mapcount goes down to 0.
> -> an old page is unchaged
>
But old page isn't uncharged iff PageSwapCache, is it ?

> move_to_new_page()
> -> may fail. (in some case.) ----(*1)
>
> remap the old page to pte.
>
> mem_cgroup_end_migration()
> (at success *1)
> check charge for newpage is valid or not (*2)
>
> (at fail *1)
> uncharge new page.
> What we should do for an old page. ---(*3)
>
> At (*2). (*3), there are several cases.
>
> (*2) migration was succeeded.
> 1. The new page was successfully remapped.
> -> Nothing to do.
> 2. The new page was remapped but finally unmapped before (*3)
> -> page_remove_rmap() will catch the event.
> 3. The new page was not remapped.
> -> page_remove_rmap() can't catch the event. end_migraion() has to
> uncharge it.
>
> (*3) migration was failed.
> 1. The old page was successfully remapped.
> -> We have to recharge against the old page. (But it may hit OOM.)
> 2. The old page wasn't remapped.
> -> mapcount is 0. No new charge will happen.
> 3. The old page wasn't remapped but SwapCache.
> -> mapcount is 0. We have to recharge against the old page (But it may hit OOM)
>
hmm, we've done try_charge at this point, so why can we cause oom here ?

> Maybe other seqence I couldn't write will exist......IMHO, "we have to recharge it because
> it's uncharged.." is bad idea. It seems hard to maintainace..
>
>
> When we use MIGRATION flag.
> After migaration.
>
> 1. Agaisnt new page, we remove MIGRATION flag and try to uncharge() it again.
>
> 2. Agaisnt old page, we remove MIGRATION flag and try to uncharge it again.
>
> NOTE: I noticed my v3 patch is buggy when the page-is-swapped-out case. It seems
> mem_cgroup_uncharge_swapcache() has to wait for migration ends or some
> other case handling. (Anyway, this race exists only after unlock_page(newpage).
> So, wait for MIGRATION ends in spin will not be very bad.)
>
>
> To me, things are much simpler than now, we have to know what kind of magics behind us...
>
> Maybe I can think of other tricks for handling them...but using a FLAG and prevent uncharge
> is the simplest, I think.
>
Anyway, I agree that current implementation is complicated and there might be
some cases we are missing. MIGRATION flag can make it simpler.

I have one concern for now. Reading the patch, the flag have influence on
only anonymous pages, so we'd better to note it and I feel it strange to
set(and clear) the flag of "old page" always(iow, even when !PageAnon)
in prepare_migration.


Thanks,
Daisuke Nishimura.


\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2010-04-19 10:15    [W:0.101 / U:0.112 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site