Re: [PATCH 3/4] memcg: split part of memcg creation to css_online
From: Glauber Costa <hidden>
Date: 2012-12-04 08:05:27
Also in:
cgroups
On 12/03/2012 09:32 PM, Michal Hocko wrote:
On Fri 30-11-12 17:31:25, Glauber Costa wrote:quoted
Although there is arguably some value in doing this per se, the main goal of this patch is to make room for the locking changes to come. With all the value assignment from parent happening in a context where our iterators can already be used, we can safely lock against value change in some key values like use_hierarchy, without resorting to the cgroup core at all.I am sorry but I really do not get why online_css callback is more appropriate. Quite contrary. With this change iterators can see a group which is not fully initialized which calls for a problem (even though it is not one yet).
But it should be extremely easy to protect against this. It is just a matter of not returning online css in the iterator: then we'll never see them until they are online. This also sounds a lot more correct than returning allocated css.
Could you be more specific why we cannot keep the initialization in mem_cgroup_css_alloc? We can lock there as well, no?
Because we need to parent value of things like use_hierarchy and oom_control not to change after it was copied to a child. If we do it in css_alloc, the iterators won't be working yet - nor will cgrp->children list, for that matter - and we will risk a situation where another thread thinks no children exist, and flips use_hierarchy to 1 (or oom_control, etc), right after the children already got the value of 0. The two other ways to solve this problem that I see, are: 1) lock in css_alloc and unlock in css_online, that tejun already ruled out as too damn ugly (and I can't possibly disagree) 2) have an alternate indication of emptiness that is working since css_alloc (like counting number of children). Since I don't share your concerns about the iterator showing incomplete memcgs - trivial to fix, if not fixed already - I deemed my approach preferable here.
quoted
Signed-off-by: Glauber Costa <redacted> --- mm/memcontrol.c | 52 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++----------------- 1 file changed, 35 insertions(+), 17 deletions(-)diff --git a/mm/memcontrol.c b/mm/memcontrol.c index d80b6b5..b6d352f 100644 --- a/mm/memcontrol.c +++ b/mm/memcontrol.c@@ -5023,12 +5023,40 @@ mem_cgroup_css_alloc(struct cgroup *cont) INIT_WORK(&stock->work, drain_local_stock); } hotcpu_notifier(memcg_cpu_hotplug_callback, 0); - } else { - parent = mem_cgroup_from_cont(cont->parent); - memcg->use_hierarchy = parent->use_hierarchy; - memcg->oom_kill_disable = parent->oom_kill_disable; + + res_counter_init(&memcg->res, NULL); + res_counter_init(&memcg->memsw, NULL); } + memcg->last_scanned_node = MAX_NUMNODES; + INIT_LIST_HEAD(&memcg->oom_notify); + atomic_set(&memcg->refcnt, 1); + memcg->move_charge_at_immigrate = 0; + mutex_init(&memcg->thresholds_lock); + spin_lock_init(&memcg->move_lock); + + return &memcg->css; + +free_out: + __mem_cgroup_free(memcg); + return ERR_PTR(error); +} + +static int +mem_cgroup_css_online(struct cgroup *cont) +{ + struct mem_cgroup *memcg, *parent; + int error = 0; + + if (!cont->parent) + return 0; + + memcg = mem_cgroup_from_cont(cont); + parent = mem_cgroup_from_cont(cont->parent); + + memcg->use_hierarchy = parent->use_hierarchy; + memcg->oom_kill_disable = parent->oom_kill_disable; + if (parent && parent->use_hierarchy) { res_counter_init(&memcg->res, &parent->res); res_counter_init(&memcg->memsw, &parent->memsw);@@ -5050,15 +5078,8 @@ mem_cgroup_css_alloc(struct cgroup *cont) if (parent && parent != root_mem_cgroup) mem_cgroup_subsys.broken_hierarchy = true; } - memcg->last_scanned_node = MAX_NUMNODES; - INIT_LIST_HEAD(&memcg->oom_notify); - if (parent) - memcg->swappiness = mem_cgroup_swappiness(parent); - atomic_set(&memcg->refcnt, 1); - memcg->move_charge_at_immigrate = 0; - mutex_init(&memcg->thresholds_lock); - spin_lock_init(&memcg->move_lock); + memcg->swappiness = mem_cgroup_swappiness(parent); error = memcg_init_kmem(memcg, &mem_cgroup_subsys); if (error) {@@ -5068,12 +5089,8 @@ mem_cgroup_css_alloc(struct cgroup *cont) * call __mem_cgroup_free, so return directly */ mem_cgroup_put(memcg); - return ERR_PTR(error); } - return &memcg->css; -free_out: - __mem_cgroup_free(memcg); - return ERR_PTR(error); + return error; } static void mem_cgroup_css_offline(struct cgroup *cont)@@ -5702,6 +5719,7 @@ struct cgroup_subsys mem_cgroup_subsys = { .name = "memory", .subsys_id = mem_cgroup_subsys_id, .css_alloc = mem_cgroup_css_alloc, + .css_online = mem_cgroup_css_online, .css_offline = mem_cgroup_css_offline, .css_free = mem_cgroup_css_free, .can_attach = mem_cgroup_can_attach,-- 1.7.11.7
-- 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/ . Don't email: <a href=mailto:"dont@kvack.org"> email@kvack.org </a>