lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2021]   [Feb]   [4]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: [PATCH 7/7] mm: memcontrol: consolidate lruvec stat flushing
On Tue, Feb 02, 2021 at 06:25:30PM -0800, Roman Gushchin wrote:
> On Tue, Feb 02, 2021 at 01:47:46PM -0500, Johannes Weiner wrote:
> > There are two functions to flush the per-cpu data of an lruvec into
> > the rest of the cgroup tree: when the cgroup is being freed, and when
> > a CPU disappears during hotplug. The difference is whether all CPUs or
> > just one is being collected, but the rest of the flushing code is the
> > same. Merge them into one function and share the common code.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Johannes Weiner <hannes@cmpxchg.org>
> > ---
> > mm/memcontrol.c | 88 +++++++++++++++++++++++--------------------------
> > 1 file changed, 42 insertions(+), 46 deletions(-)
> >
> > diff --git a/mm/memcontrol.c b/mm/memcontrol.c
> > index b205b2413186..88e8afc49a46 100644
> > --- a/mm/memcontrol.c
> > +++ b/mm/memcontrol.c
> > @@ -2410,39 +2410,56 @@ static void drain_all_stock(struct mem_cgroup *root_memcg)
> > mutex_unlock(&percpu_charge_mutex);
> > }
> >
> > -static int memcg_hotplug_cpu_dead(unsigned int cpu)
> > +static void memcg_flush_lruvec_page_state(struct mem_cgroup *memcg, int cpu)
> > {
> > - struct memcg_stock_pcp *stock;
> > - struct mem_cgroup *memcg;
> > -
> > - stock = &per_cpu(memcg_stock, cpu);
> > - drain_stock(stock);
> > + int nid;
> >
> > - for_each_mem_cgroup(memcg) {
> > + for_each_node(nid) {
> > + struct mem_cgroup_per_node *pn = memcg->nodeinfo[nid];
> > + unsigned long stat[NR_VM_NODE_STAT_ITEMS] = { 0, };
> ^^^^
> Same here.
>
> > + struct batched_lruvec_stat *lstatc;
> > int i;
> >
> > - for (i = 0; i < NR_VM_NODE_STAT_ITEMS; i++) {
> > - int nid;
> > -
> > - for_each_node(nid) {
> > - struct batched_lruvec_stat *lstatc;
> > - struct mem_cgroup_per_node *pn;
> > - long x;
> > -
> > - pn = memcg->nodeinfo[nid];
> > + if (cpu == -1) {
> > + int cpui;
> > + /*
> > + * The memcg is about to be freed, collect all
> > + * CPUs, no need to zero anything out.
> > + */
> > + for_each_online_cpu(cpui) {
> > + lstatc = per_cpu_ptr(pn->lruvec_stat_cpu, cpui);
> > + for (i = 0; i < NR_VM_NODE_STAT_ITEMS; i++)
> > + stat[i] += lstatc->count[i];
> > + }
> > + } else {
> > + /*
> > + * The CPU has gone away, collect and zero out
> > + * its stats, it may come back later.
> > + */
> > + for (i = 0; i < NR_VM_NODE_STAT_ITEMS; i++) {
> > lstatc = per_cpu_ptr(pn->lruvec_stat_cpu, cpu);
> > -
> > - x = lstatc->count[i];
> > + stat[i] = lstatc->count[i];
> > lstatc->count[i] = 0;
> > -
> > - if (x) {
> > - do {
> > - atomic_long_add(x, &pn->lruvec_stat[i]);
> > - } while ((pn = parent_nodeinfo(pn, nid)));
> > - }
> > }
> > }
> > +
> > + do {
> > + for (i = 0; i < NR_VM_NODE_STAT_ITEMS; i++)
> > + atomic_long_add(stat[i], &pn->lruvec_stat[i]);
> > + } while ((pn = parent_nodeinfo(pn, nid)));
> > }
> > +}
> > +
> > +static int memcg_hotplug_cpu_dead(unsigned int cpu)
> > +{
> > + struct memcg_stock_pcp *stock;
> > + struct mem_cgroup *memcg;
> > +
> > + stock = &per_cpu(memcg_stock, cpu);
> > + drain_stock(stock);
> > +
> > + for_each_mem_cgroup(memcg)
> > + memcg_flush_lruvec_page_state(memcg, cpu);
> >
> > return 0;
> > }
> > @@ -3636,27 +3653,6 @@ static u64 mem_cgroup_read_u64(struct cgroup_subsys_state *css,
> > }
> > }
> >
> > -static void memcg_flush_lruvec_page_state(struct mem_cgroup *memcg)
> > -{
> > - int node;
> > -
> > - for_each_node(node) {
> > - struct mem_cgroup_per_node *pn = memcg->nodeinfo[node];
> > - unsigned long stat[NR_VM_NODE_STAT_ITEMS] = {0, };
> > - struct mem_cgroup_per_node *pi;
> > - int cpu, i;
> > -
> > - for_each_online_cpu(cpu)
> > - for (i = 0; i < NR_VM_NODE_STAT_ITEMS; i++)
> > - stat[i] += per_cpu(
> > - pn->lruvec_stat_cpu->count[i], cpu);
> > -
> > - for (pi = pn; pi; pi = parent_nodeinfo(pi, node))
> > - for (i = 0; i < NR_VM_NODE_STAT_ITEMS; i++)
> > - atomic_long_add(stat[i], &pi->lruvec_stat[i]);
> > - }
> > -}
> > -
> > #ifdef CONFIG_MEMCG_KMEM
> > static int memcg_online_kmem(struct mem_cgroup *memcg)
> > {
> > @@ -5197,7 +5193,7 @@ static void mem_cgroup_free(struct mem_cgroup *memcg)
> > * Flush percpu lruvec stats to guarantee the value
> > * correctness on parent's and all ancestor levels.
> > */
> > - memcg_flush_lruvec_page_state(memcg);
> > + memcg_flush_lruvec_page_state(memcg, -1);
>
> I wonder if adding "cpu" or "percpu" into the function name will make clearer what -1 means?
> E.g. memcg_flush_(per)cpu_lruvec_stats(memcg, -1).

Yes, it's a bit ominous. I changed it to

memcg_flush_lruvec_page_state_cpu(memcg, -1);

percpu would have pushed the function signature over 80 characters.

> Reviewed-by: Roman Gushchin <guro@fb.com>

Thanks

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2021-02-04 22:51    [W:0.089 / U:0.048 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site