Re: [PATCH v3 1/3] mm: rework memcg kernel stack accounting
From: Roman Gushchin <hidden>
Date: 2018-08-27 23:19:38
Also in:
lkml
Subsystem:
control group - memory resource controller (memcg), exec & binfmt api, elf, memory management - core, scheduler, the rest · Maintainers:
Johannes Weiner, Michal Hocko, Roman Gushchin, Shakeel Butt, Kees Cook, Andrew Morton, David Hildenbrand, Ingo Molnar, Peter Zijlstra, Juri Lelli, Vincent Guittot, Linus Torvalds
On Mon, Aug 27, 2018 at 02:01:43PM -0700, Andrew Morton wrote:
On Mon, 27 Aug 2018 09:26:19 -0700 Roman Gushchin [off-list ref] wrote:
quoted
If CONFIG_VMAP_STACK is set, kernel stacks are allocated
using __vmalloc_node_range() with __GFP_ACCOUNT. So kernel
stack pages are charged against corresponding memory cgroups
on allocation and uncharged on releasing them.
The problem is that we do cache kernel stacks in small
per-cpu caches and do reuse them for new tasks, which can
belong to different memory cgroups.
Each stack page still holds a reference to the original cgroup,
so the cgroup can't be released until the vmap area is released.
To make this happen we need more than two subsequent exits
without forks in between on the current cpu, which makes it
very unlikely to happen. As a result, I saw a significant number
of dying cgroups (in theory, up to 2 * number_of_cpu +
number_of_tasks), which can't be released even by significant
memory pressure.
As a cgroup structure can take a significant amount of memory
(first of all, per-cpu data like memcg statistics), it leads
to a noticeable waste of memory.
OK, but this doesn't describe how the patch addresses this issue?
Sorry, missed this part. Let's add the following paragraph to the
commit message (the full updated patch is below):
To address the issue, let's charge thread stacks on assigning
them to tasks, and uncharge on releasing them and putting into
the per-cpu cache. So, cached stacks will not be assigned to
any memcg and will not hold any memcg reference.
quoted
...
@@ -371,6 +382,35 @@ static void account_kernel_stack(struct task_struct *tsk, int account)
}
}
+static int memcg_charge_kernel_stack(struct task_struct *tsk)
+{
+#ifdef CONFIG_VMAP_STACK
+ struct vm_struct *vm = task_stack_vm_area(tsk);
+ int ret;
+
+ if (vm) {
+ int i;
+
+ for (i = 0; i < THREAD_SIZE / PAGE_SIZE; i++) {
Can we ever have THREAD_SIZE < PAGE_SIZE? 64k pages?
Hm, good question!
We can, but I doubt that anyone using 64k pages AND CONFIG_VMAP_STACK,
and I *suspect* that it will trigger the BUG_ON() in account_kernel_stack():
static void account_kernel_stack(struct task_struct *tsk, int account) {
...
if (vm) {
...
BUG_ON(vm->nr_pages != THREAD_SIZE / PAGE_SIZE);
But I don't see anything that makes such a config illegitimate.
Does it makes any sense to use vmap if THREAD_SIZE < PAGE_SIZE?
quoted
+ /*
+ * If memcg_kmem_charge() fails, page->mem_cgroup
+ * pointer is NULL, and both memcg_kmem_uncharge()
+ * and mod_memcg_page_state() in free_thread_stack()
+ * will ignore this page. So it's safe.
+ */
+ ret = memcg_kmem_charge(vm->pages[i], GFP_KERNEL, 0);
+ if (ret)
+ return ret;
+
+ mod_memcg_page_state(vm->pages[i],
+ MEMCG_KERNEL_STACK_KB,
+ PAGE_SIZE / 1024);
+ }
+ }
+#endif
+ return 0;
+}
...
Thanks!
--