From: Roman Gushchin <roman.gushchin@linux.dev>
To: Shakeel Butt <shakeelb@google.com>
Cc: Vlastimil Babka <vbabka@suse.cz>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, cgroups@vger.kernel.org,
Johannes Weiner <hannes@cmpxchg.org>,
Michal Hocko <mhocko@kernel.org>,
Muchun Song <muchun.song@linux.dev>,
Dennis Zhou <dennis@kernel.org>,
David Rientjes <rientjes@google.com>,
Naresh Kamboju <naresh.kamboju@linaro.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 2/5] mm: kmem: add direct objcg pointer to task_struct
Date: Wed, 18 Oct 2023 15:37:58 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <ZTBeRu3iDu7nnPV8@P9FQF9L96D.corp.robot.car> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CALvZod6mb91o9pW57suovtW1UQ8G8j=2S3Tjoqzjh6L+jqz-EQ@mail.gmail.com>
On Wed, Oct 18, 2023 at 11:26:59AM -0700, Shakeel Butt wrote:
> On Wed, Oct 18, 2023 at 10:22 AM Roman Gushchin
> <roman.gushchin@linux.dev> wrote:
> >
> [...]
> > > > struct mem_cgroup *memcg;
> > > > @@ -3008,19 +3054,26 @@ __always_inline struct obj_cgroup *get_obj_cgroup_from_current(void)
> > > >
> > > > if (in_task()) {
> > > > memcg = current->active_memcg;
> > > > + if (unlikely(memcg))
> > > > + goto from_memcg;
> > > >
> > > > - /* Memcg to charge can't be determined. */
> > > > - if (likely(!memcg) && (!current->mm || (current->flags & PF_KTHREAD)))
> > >
> > > The checks for current->mm and PF_KTHREAD seem to be gone completely after
> > > the patch, was that intended and why?
> >
> > There is no need for those anymore because it's as cheap or cheaper
> > to check task->objcg for being NULL. Those were primarily used to rule out
> > kernel threads allocations early.
> >
>
> I have the same understanding but please correct my suspicions here.
> We can echo the kernel thread's pid to cgroup.procs which have
> PF_NO_SETAFFINITY and thus this will cause the lower bit of the kernel
> thread's task->objcg to be set. Please correct me if I am missing
> something.
Yes, you seem to be right. It's a gray zone because moving kernel threads out of
the root cgroup doesn't sound like a good idea, but I agree it's better to keep
the old behavior in place.
Does this fixlet look good to you?
Thanks!
--
diff --git a/mm/memcontrol.c b/mm/memcontrol.c
index 1a2835448028..0b0d2dc7a7d4 100644
--- a/mm/memcontrol.c
+++ b/mm/memcontrol.c
@@ -3021,6 +3021,10 @@ static struct obj_cgroup *current_objcg_update(void)
old = NULL;
}
+ /* If new objcg is NULL, no reason for the second atomic update. */
+ if (!current->mm || (current->flags & PF_KTHREAD))
+ return NULL;
+
/*
* Release the objcg pointer from the previous iteration,
* if try_cmpxcg() below fails.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2023-10-18 22:38 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 19+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2023-10-16 22:18 [PATCH v3 0/5] mm: improve performance of accounted kernel memory allocations Roman Gushchin
2023-10-16 22:18 ` [PATCH v3 1/5] mm: kmem: optimize get_obj_cgroup_from_current() Roman Gushchin
2023-10-17 9:57 ` Vlastimil Babka
2023-10-16 22:18 ` [PATCH v3 2/5] mm: kmem: add direct objcg pointer to task_struct Roman Gushchin
2023-10-16 22:34 ` Shakeel Butt
2023-10-18 9:52 ` Vlastimil Babka
2023-10-18 14:11 ` Vlastimil Babka
2023-10-18 15:29 ` Shakeel Butt
2023-10-18 17:22 ` Roman Gushchin
2023-10-18 18:26 ` Shakeel Butt
2023-10-18 22:37 ` Roman Gushchin [this message]
2023-10-19 16:36 ` Shakeel Butt
2023-10-16 22:18 ` [PATCH v3 3/5] mm: kmem: make memcg keep a reference to the original objcg Roman Gushchin
2023-10-18 11:58 ` Vlastimil Babka
2023-10-18 14:06 ` Vlastimil Babka
2023-10-16 22:18 ` [PATCH v3 4/5] mm: kmem: scoped objcg protection Roman Gushchin
2023-10-18 14:04 ` Vlastimil Babka
2023-10-16 22:19 ` [PATCH v3 5/5] percpu: " Roman Gushchin
2023-10-18 14:23 ` Vlastimil Babka
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=ZTBeRu3iDu7nnPV8@P9FQF9L96D.corp.robot.car \
--to=roman.gushchin@linux.dev \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=cgroups@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=dennis@kernel.org \
--cc=hannes@cmpxchg.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mhocko@kernel.org \
--cc=muchun.song@linux.dev \
--cc=naresh.kamboju@linaro.org \
--cc=rientjes@google.com \
--cc=shakeelb@google.com \
--cc=vbabka@suse.cz \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox
all inboxes | Powered by JetHome®