Re: [PATCH v3 13/28] slub: create duplicate cache
From: Glauber Costa <hidden>
Date: 2012-05-29 15:58:43
Also in:
linux-mm, lkml
On 05/29/2012 06:36 PM, Christoph Lameter wrote:
On Fri, 25 May 2012, Glauber Costa wrote:quoted
index dacd1fb..4689034 100644--- a/mm/memcontrol.c +++ b/mm/memcontrol.c@@ -467,6 +467,23 @@ struct cg_proto *tcp_proto_cgroup(struct mem_cgroup *memcg) EXPORT_SYMBOL(tcp_proto_cgroup); #endif /* CONFIG_INET */ +char *mem_cgroup_cache_name(struct mem_cgroup *memcg, struct kmem_cache *cachep) +{ + char *name; + struct dentry *dentry; + + rcu_read_lock(); + dentry = rcu_dereference(memcg->css.cgroup->dentry); + rcu_read_unlock(); + + BUG_ON(dentry == NULL); + + name = kasprintf(GFP_KERNEL, "%s(%d:%s)", + cachep->name, css_id(&memcg->css), dentry->d_name.name); + + return name; +}Function allocates a string that is supposed to be disposed of by the caller. That needs to be documented and maybe even the name needs to reflect that.
Okay, I can change it.
quoted
--- a/mm/slub.c +++ b/mm/slub.c@@ -4002,6 +4002,38 @@ struct kmem_cache *kmem_cache_create(const char *name, size_t size, } EXPORT_SYMBOL(kmem_cache_create); +#ifdef CONFIG_CGROUP_MEM_RES_CTLR_KMEM +struct kmem_cache *kmem_cache_dup(struct mem_cgroup *memcg, + struct kmem_cache *s) +{ + char *name; + struct kmem_cache *new; + + name = mem_cgroup_cache_name(memcg, s); + if (!name) + return NULL; + + new = kmem_cache_create_memcg(memcg, name, s->objsize, s->align, + (s->allocflags& ~SLAB_PANIC), s->ctor);Hmmm... A full duplicate of the slab cache? We may have many sparsely used portions of the per node and per cpu structure as a result.
I've already commented on patch 0, but I will repeat it here. This approach leads to more fragmentation, yes, but this is exactly to be less intrusive. With a full copy, all I need to do is: 1) relay the allocation to the right cache. 2) account for a new page when it is needed. How does the cache work from inside? I don't care. Accounting pages seems just crazy to me. If new allocators come in the future, organizing the pages in a different way, instead of patching it here and there, we need to totally rewrite this. If those allocators happen to depend on a specific placement for performance, then we're destroying this as well too.
quoted
+ * prevent it from being deleted. If kmem_cache_destroy() is + * called for the root cache before we call it for a child cache, + * it will be queued for destruction when we finally drop the + * reference on the child cache. + */ + if (new) { + down_write(&slub_lock); + s->refcount++; + up_write(&slub_lock); + }Why do you need to increase the refcount? You made a full copy right?
Yes, but I don't want this copy to go away while we have other caches around. So, in the memcg internals, I used a different reference counter, to avoid messing with this one. I could use that, and leave the original refcnt alone. Would you prefer this? -- To unsubscribe, send a message with 'unsubscribe linux-mm' in the body to majordomo@kvack.org. For more info on Linux MM, see: http://www.linux-mm.org/ . Fight unfair telecom internet charges in Canada: sign http://stopthemeter.ca/ Don't email: <a href=mailto:"dont@kvack.org"> email@kvack.org </a>