mirror of https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: David Hildenbrand <david@redhat.com>
To: Yang Shi <shy828301@gmail.com>, Kirill Tkhai <ktkhai@virtuozzo.com>
Cc: Michal Hocko <mhocko@suse.com>, Nico Pache <npache@redhat.com>,
	Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
	Linux MM <linux-mm@kvack.org>,
	Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
	Shakeel Butt <shakeelb@google.com>, Roman Gushchin <guro@fb.com>,
	Vlastimil Babka <vbabka@suse.cz>,
	Vladimir Davydov <vdavydov.dev@gmail.com>,
	raquini@redhat.com
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH 2/2] mm/vmscan.c: Prevent allocating shrinker_info on offlined nodes
Date: Mon, 6 Dec 2021 20:01:34 +0100	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <a48c16d6-07df-ff44-67e6-f0942672ec28@redhat.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CAHbLzko0UeNadswXEnwr6EtuKAZT4T-fnC5F7xnFcH4RbjhAiA@mail.gmail.com>

On 06.12.21 19:42, Yang Shi wrote:
> On Mon, Dec 6, 2021 at 5:19 AM Kirill Tkhai <ktkhai@virtuozzo.com> wrote:
>>
>> On 06.12.2021 13:45, David Hildenbrand wrote:
>>>> This doesn't seen complete. Slab shrinkers are used in the reclaim
>>>> context. Previously offline nodes could be onlined later and this would
>>>> lead to NULL ptr because there is no hook to allocate new shrinker
>>>> infos. This would be also really impractical because this would have to
>>>> update all existing memcgs...
>>>
>>> Instead of going through the trouble of updating...
>>>
>>> ...  maybe just keep for_each_node() and check if the target node is
>>> offline. If it's offline, just allocate from the first online node.
>>> After all, we're not using __GFP_THISNODE, so there are no guarantees
>>> either way ...
>>
>> Hm, can't we add shrinker maps allocation to __try_online_node() in addition
>> to this patch?
> 
> I think the below fix (an example, doesn't cover all affected
> callsites) should be good enough for now? It doesn't touch the hot
> path of the page allocator.
> 
> diff --git a/mm/vmscan.c b/mm/vmscan.c
> index fb9584641ac7..1252a33f7c28 100644
> --- a/mm/vmscan.c
> +++ b/mm/vmscan.c
> @@ -222,13 +222,15 @@ static int expand_one_shrinker_info(struct
> mem_cgroup *memcg,
>         int size = map_size + defer_size;
> 
>         for_each_node(nid) {
> +               int tmp = nid;
>                 pn = memcg->nodeinfo[nid];
>                 old = shrinker_info_protected(memcg, nid);
>                 /* Not yet online memcg */
>                 if (!old)
>                         return 0;
> -
> -               new = kvmalloc_node(sizeof(*new) + size, GFP_KERNEL, nid);
> +               if (!node_online(nid))
> +                       tmp = -1;
> +               new = kvmalloc_node(sizeof(*new) + size, GFP_KERNEL, tmp);
>                 if (!new)
>                         return -ENOMEM;
> 
> It used to use kvmalloc instead of kvmalloc_node(). The commit
> 86daf94efb11d7319fbef5e480018c4807add6ef ("mm/memcontrol.c: allocate
> shrinker_map on appropriate NUMA node") changed to use *_node()
> version. The justification was that "kswapd is always bound to
> specific node. So allocate shrinker_map from the related NUMA node to
> respect its NUMA locality." There is no kswapd for offlined node, so
> just allocate shrinker info on node 0. This is also what
> alloc_mem_cgroup_per_node_info() does.

Yes, that's what I refer to as fixing it in the caller -- similar to
[1]. Michals point is to not require such node_online() checks at all,
neither in the caller nor in the buddy.

I see 2 options short-term

1) What we have in [1].
2) What I proposed in [2], fixing it for all such instances until we
have something better.

Long term I tend to agree that what Michal proposes is better.

Short term I tend to like [2], because it avoids having to mess with all
such instances to eventually get it right and the temporary overhead
until we have the code reworked should be really negligible ...



[1] https://lkml.kernel.org/r/20211108202325.20304-1-amakhalov@vmware.com
[2]
https://lkml.kernel.org/r/51c65635-1dae-6ba4-daf9-db9df0ec35d8@redhat.com

-- 
Thanks,

David / dhildenb


  reply	other threads:[~2021-12-06 19:02 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 37+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2021-12-06  3:33 [RFC PATCH 0/2] mm: Dont allocate pages on a offline node Nico Pache
2021-12-06  3:33 ` [RFC PATCH 1/2] include/linux/gfp.h: Do not allocate pages on a offlined node Nico Pache
2021-12-06  3:37   ` Matthew Wilcox
2021-12-06  8:29   ` David Hildenbrand
2021-12-06  9:22   ` Michal Hocko
2021-12-07 21:24     ` Nico Pache
2021-12-06  3:33 ` [RFC PATCH 2/2] mm/vmscan.c: Prevent allocating shrinker_info on offlined nodes Nico Pache
2021-12-06  8:32   ` David Hildenbrand
2021-12-06  9:22   ` Michal Hocko
2021-12-06  9:24     ` Michal Hocko
2021-12-06 10:45     ` David Hildenbrand
2021-12-06 10:54       ` Michal Hocko
2021-12-06 11:00         ` David Hildenbrand
2021-12-06 11:22           ` Michal Hocko
2021-12-06 12:43             ` David Hildenbrand
2021-12-06 13:06               ` Michal Hocko
2021-12-06 13:47                 ` David Hildenbrand
2021-12-06 14:06                   ` Michal Hocko
2021-12-06 14:08                     ` David Hildenbrand
2021-12-06 14:21                       ` Michal Hocko
2021-12-06 14:30                         ` Vlastimil Babka
2021-12-06 14:53                           ` Michal Hocko
2021-12-06 18:26                             ` Yang Shi
2021-12-07 10:15                               ` Michal Hocko
2021-12-06 14:15                   ` Michal Hocko
2021-12-06 13:19       ` Kirill Tkhai
2021-12-06 13:24         ` Michal Hocko
2021-12-08 19:00           ` Nico Pache
2021-12-06 18:42         ` Yang Shi
2021-12-06 19:01           ` David Hildenbrand [this message]
2021-12-06 21:28             ` Yang Shi
2021-12-07 10:15               ` David Hildenbrand
2021-12-07 10:55             ` Michal Hocko
2021-12-07 21:45         ` Nico Pache
2021-12-07 21:40       ` Nico Pache
2021-12-07 21:34     ` Nico Pache
2021-12-06 18:45   ` Yang Shi

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=a48c16d6-07df-ff44-67e6-f0942672ec28@redhat.com \
    --to=david@redhat.com \
    --cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
    --cc=guro@fb.com \
    --cc=ktkhai@virtuozzo.com \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
    --cc=mhocko@suse.com \
    --cc=npache@redhat.com \
    --cc=raquini@redhat.com \
    --cc=shakeelb@google.com \
    --cc=shy828301@gmail.com \
    --cc=vbabka@suse.cz \
    --cc=vdavydov.dev@gmail.com \
    /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®