lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2012]   [Jun]   [21]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: [PATCH 2/2] memcg: add per cgroup dirty pages accounting
(2012/06/19 23:31), Sha Zhengju wrote:
> On Sat, Jun 16, 2012 at 2:34 PM, Kamezawa Hiroyuki
> <kamezawa.hiroyu@jp.fujitsu.com> wrote:
>> (2012/06/16 0:32), Greg Thelen wrote:
>>>
>>> On Fri, Jun 15 2012, Sha Zhengju wrote:
>>>
>>>> This patch adds memcg routines to count dirty pages. I notice that
>>>> the list has talked about per-cgroup dirty page limiting
>>>> (http://lwn.net/Articles/455341/) before, but it did not get merged.
>>>
>>>
>>> Good timing, I was just about to make another effort to get some of
>>> these patches upstream. Like you, I was going to start with some basic
>>> counters.
>>>
>>> Your approach is similar to what I have in mind. While it is good to
>>> use the existing PageDirty flag, rather than introducing a new
>>> page_cgroup flag, there are locking complications (see below) to handle
>>> races between moving pages between memcg and the pages being {un}marked
>>> dirty.
>>>
>>>> I've no idea how is this going now, but maybe we can add per cgroup
>>>> dirty pages accounting first. This allows the memory controller to
>>>> maintain an accurate view of the amount of its memory that is dirty
>>>> and can provide some infomation while group's direct reclaim is working.
>>>>
>>>> After commit 89c06bd5 (memcg: use new logic for page stat accounting),
>>>> we do not need per page_cgroup flag anymore and can directly use
>>>> struct page flag.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Signed-off-by: Sha Zhengju<handai.szj@taobao.com>
>>>> ---
>>>> include/linux/memcontrol.h | 1 +
>>>> mm/filemap.c | 1 +
>>>> mm/memcontrol.c | 32 +++++++++++++++++++++++++-------
>>>> mm/page-writeback.c | 2 ++
>>>> mm/truncate.c | 1 +
>>>> 5 files changed, 30 insertions(+), 7 deletions(-)
>>>>
>>>> diff --git a/include/linux/memcontrol.h b/include/linux/memcontrol.h
>>>> index a337c2e..8154ade 100644
>>>> --- a/include/linux/memcontrol.h
>>>> +++ b/include/linux/memcontrol.h
>>>> @@ -39,6 +39,7 @@ enum mem_cgroup_stat_index {
>>>> MEM_CGROUP_STAT_FILE_MAPPED, /* # of pages charged as file rss */
>>>> MEM_CGROUP_STAT_SWAPOUT, /* # of pages, swapped out */
>>>> MEM_CGROUP_STAT_DATA, /* end of data requires synchronization */
>>>> + MEM_CGROUP_STAT_FILE_DIRTY, /* # of dirty pages in page cache */
>>>> MEM_CGROUP_STAT_NSTATS,
>>>> };
>>>>
>>>> diff --git a/mm/filemap.c b/mm/filemap.c
>>>> index 79c4b2b..5b5c121 100644
>>>> --- a/mm/filemap.c
>>>> +++ b/mm/filemap.c
>>>> @@ -141,6 +141,7 @@ void __delete_from_page_cache(struct page *page)
>>>> * having removed the page entirely.
>>>> */
>>>> if (PageDirty(page)&& mapping_cap_account_dirty(mapping)) {
>>>> + mem_cgroup_dec_page_stat(page,
>>>> MEM_CGROUP_STAT_FILE_DIRTY);
>>>
>>>
>>> You need to use mem_cgroup_{begin,end}_update_page_stat around critical
>>> sections that:
>>> 1) check PageDirty
>>> 2) update MEM_CGROUP_STAT_FILE_DIRTY counter
>>>
>>> This protects against the page from being moved between memcg while
>>> accounting. Same comment applies to all of your new calls to
>>> mem_cgroup_{dec,inc}_page_stat. For usage pattern, see
>>> page_add_file_rmap.
>>>
>>
>> If you feel some difficulty with mem_cgroup_{begin,end}_update_page_stat(),
>> please let me know...I hope they should work enough....
>>
>
> Hi, Kame
>
> While digging into the bigger lock of mem_cgroup_{begin,end}_update_page_stat(),
> I find the reality is more complex than I thought. Simply stated,
> modifying page info
> and update page stat may be wide apart and in different level (eg.
> mm&fs), so if we
> use the big lock it may lead to scalability and maintainability issues.
>
> For example:
> mem_cgroup_begin_update_page_stat()
> modify page information => TestSetPageDirty in ceph_set_page_dirty() (fs/ceph/addr.c)
> XXXXXX => other fs operations
> mem_cgroup_update_page_stat() => account_page_dirtied() in mm/page-writeback.c
> mem_cgroup_end_update_page_stat().
>
> We can choose to get lock in higher level meaning vfs set_page_dirty()
> but this may span
> too much and can also have some missing cases.
> What's your opinion of this problem?
>

yes, that's sad....If set_page_dirty() is always called under lock_page(), the
story will be easier (we'll take lock_page() in move side.)
but the comment on set_page_dirty() says it's not true.....Now, I haven't found a magical
way for avoiding the race.
(*) If holding lock_page() in move_account() can be a generic solution, it will be good.
A proposal from me is a small-start. You can start from adding hooks to a generic
functions as set_page_dirty() and __set_page_dirty_nobuffers(), clear_page_dirty_for_io().

And see what happens. I guess we can add WARN_ONCE() against callers of update_page_stat()
who don't take mem_cgroup_begin/end_update_page_stat()
(by some new check, for example, checking !rcu_read_lock_held() in update_stat())

I think we can make TODO list and catch up remaining things one by one.

Thanks,
-Kame

















--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2012-06-21 10:41    [from the cache]
©2003-2011 Jasper Spaans