Re: [PATCH v3 1/7] Basic kernel memory functionality for the MemoryController

[KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki]

On Sun, 18 Sep 2011 21:56:39 -0300
Glauber Costa <glommer@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

> This patch lays down the foundation for the kernel memory component
> of the Memory Controller.
> 
> As of today, I am only laying down the following files:
> 
>  * memory.independent_kmem_limit
>  * memory.kmem.limit_in_bytes (currently ignored)
>  * memory.kmem.usage_in_bytes (always zero)
> 
> Signed-off-by: Glauber Costa <glommer@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> CC: Paul Menage <paul@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> CC: Greg Thelen <gthelen@xxxxxxxxxx>

I'm sorry that my slow review is delaying you.


> ---
>  Documentation/cgroups/memory.txt |   30 +++++++++-
>  init/Kconfig                     |   11 ++++
>  mm/memcontrol.c                  |  115 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++--
>  3 files changed, 148 insertions(+), 8 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/Documentation/cgroups/memory.txt b/Documentation/cgroups/memory.txt
> index 6f3c598..6f1954a 100644
> --- a/Documentation/cgroups/memory.txt
> +++ b/Documentation/cgroups/memory.txt
> @@ -44,8 +44,9 @@ Features:
>   - oom-killer disable knob and oom-notifier
>   - Root cgroup has no limit controls.
>  
> - Kernel memory and Hugepages are not under control yet. We just manage
> - pages on LRU. To add more controls, we have to take care of performance.
> + Hugepages is not under control yet. We just manage pages on LRU. To add more
> + controls, we have to take care of performance. Kernel memory support is work
> + in progress, and the current version provides basically functionality.
>  
>  Brief summary of control files.
>  
> @@ -56,8 +57,11 @@ Brief summary of control files.
>  				 (See 5.5 for details)
>   memory.memsw.usage_in_bytes	 # show current res_counter usage for memory+Swap
>  				 (See 5.5 for details)
> + memory.kmem.usage_in_bytes	 # show current res_counter usage for kmem only.
> +				 (See 2.7 for details)
>   memory.limit_in_bytes		 # set/show limit of memory usage
>   memory.memsw.limit_in_bytes	 # set/show limit of memory+Swap usage
> + memory.kmem.limit_in_bytes	 # if allowed, set/show limit of kernel memory
>   memory.failcnt			 # show the number of memory usage hits limits
>   memory.memsw.failcnt		 # show the number of memory+Swap hits limits
>   memory.max_usage_in_bytes	 # show max memory usage recorded
> @@ -72,6 +76,9 @@ Brief summary of control files.
>   memory.oom_control		 # set/show oom controls.
>   memory.numa_stat		 # show the number of memory usage per numa node
>  
> + memory.independent_kmem_limit	 # select whether or not kernel memory limits are
> +				   independent of user limits
> +
>  1. History
>  
>  The memory controller has a long history. A request for comments for the memory
> @@ -255,6 +262,25 @@ When oom event notifier is registered, event will be delivered.
>    per-zone-per-cgroup LRU (cgroup's private LRU) is just guarded by
>    zone->lru_lock, it has no lock of its own.
>  
> +2.7 Kernel Memory Extension (CONFIG_CGROUP_MEM_RES_CTLR_KMEM)
> +
> + With the Kernel memory extension, the Memory Controller is able to limit
> +the amount of kernel memory used by the system. Kernel memory is fundamentally
> +different than user memory, since it can't be swapped out, which makes it
> +possible to DoS the system by consuming too much of this precious resource.
> +Kernel memory limits are not imposed for the root cgroup.
> +
> +Memory limits as specified by the standard Memory Controller may or may not
> +take kernel memory into consideration. This is achieved through the file
> +memory.independent_kmem_limit. A Value different than 0 will allow for kernel
> +memory to be controlled separately.
> +
> +When kernel memory limits are not independent, the limit values set in
> +memory.kmem files are ignored.
> +
> +Currently no soft limit is implemented for kernel memory. It is future work
> +to trigger slab reclaim when those limits are reached.
> +
>  3. User Interface
>  
>  0. Configuration
> diff --git a/init/Kconfig b/init/Kconfig
> index d627783..49e5839 100644
> --- a/init/Kconfig
> +++ b/init/Kconfig
> @@ -689,6 +689,17 @@ config CGROUP_MEM_RES_CTLR_SWAP_ENABLED
>  	  For those who want to have the feature enabled by default should
>  	  select this option (if, for some reason, they need to disable it
>  	  then swapaccount=0 does the trick).
> +config CGROUP_MEM_RES_CTLR_KMEM
> +	bool "Memory Resource Controller Kernel Memory accounting"
> +	depends on CGROUP_MEM_RES_CTLR
> +	default y
> +	help
> +	  The Kernel Memory extension for Memory Resource Controller can limit
> +	  the amount of memory used by kernel objects in the system. Those are
> +	  fundamentally different from the entities handled by the standard
> +	  Memory Controller, which are page-based, and can be swapped. Users of
> +	  the kmem extension can use it to guarantee that no group of processes
> +	  will ever exhaust kernel resources alone.
>  
>  config CGROUP_PERF
>  	bool "Enable perf_event per-cpu per-container group (cgroup) monitoring"
> diff --git a/mm/memcontrol.c b/mm/memcontrol.c
> index ebd1e86..d32e931 100644
> --- a/mm/memcontrol.c
> +++ b/mm/memcontrol.c
> @@ -73,7 +73,11 @@ static int really_do_swap_account __initdata = 0;
>  #define do_swap_account		(0)
>  #endif
>  
> -
> +#ifdef CONFIG_CGROUP_MEM_RES_CTLR_KMEM
> +int do_kmem_account __read_mostly = 1;
> +#else
> +#define do_kmem_account		0
> +#endif


Hmm, do we really need this boot option ?
>From my experience to have swap-accounting boot option,
this scares us ;) I think config is enough.




>  /*
>   * Statistics for memory cgroup.
>   */
> @@ -270,6 +274,10 @@ struct mem_cgroup {
>  	 */
>  	struct res_counter memsw;
>  	/*
> +	 * the counter to account for kmem usage.
> +	 */
> +	struct res_counter kmem;
> +	/*
>  	 * Per cgroup active and inactive list, similar to the
>  	 * per zone LRU lists.
>  	 */
> @@ -321,6 +329,11 @@ struct mem_cgroup {
>  	 */
>  	unsigned long 	move_charge_at_immigrate;
>  	/*
> +	 * Should kernel memory limits be stabilished independently
> +	 * from user memory ?
> +	 */
> +	int		kmem_independent;
> +	/*
>  	 * percpu counter.
>  	 */
>  	struct mem_cgroup_stat_cpu *stat;
> @@ -388,9 +401,14 @@ enum charge_type {
>  };
>  
>  /* for encoding cft->private value on file */
> -#define _MEM			(0)
> -#define _MEMSWAP		(1)
> -#define _OOM_TYPE		(2)
> +
> +enum mem_type {
> +	_MEM = 0,
> +	_MEMSWAP,
> +	_OOM_TYPE,
> +	_KMEM,
> +};
> +

ok, nice clean up.


>  #define MEMFILE_PRIVATE(x, val)	(((x) << 16) | (val))
>  #define MEMFILE_TYPE(val)	(((val) >> 16) & 0xffff)
>  #define MEMFILE_ATTR(val)	((val) & 0xffff)
> @@ -3943,10 +3961,15 @@ static inline u64 mem_cgroup_usage(struct mem_cgroup *mem, bool swap)
>  	u64 val;
>  
>  	if (!mem_cgroup_is_root(mem)) {
> +		val = 0;
> +		if (!mem->kmem_independent)
> +			val = res_counter_read_u64(&mem->kmem, RES_USAGE);

>  		if (!swap)
> -			return res_counter_read_u64(&mem->res, RES_USAGE);
> +			val += res_counter_read_u64(&mem->res, RES_USAGE);
>  		else
> -			return res_counter_read_u64(&mem->memsw, RES_USAGE);
> +			val += res_counter_read_u64(&mem->memsw, RES_USAGE);
> +
> +		return val;
>  	}
>  
>  	val = mem_cgroup_recursive_stat(mem, MEM_CGROUP_STAT_CACHE);
> @@ -3979,6 +4002,10 @@ static u64 mem_cgroup_read(struct cgroup *cont, struct cftype *cft)
>  		else
>  			val = res_counter_read_u64(&mem->memsw, name);
>  		break;
> +	case _KMEM:
> +		val = res_counter_read_u64(&mem->kmem, name);
> +		break;
> +
>  	default:
>  		BUG();
>  		break;
> @@ -4756,6 +4783,21 @@ static int mem_cgroup_reset_vmscan_stat(struct cgroup *cgrp,
>  	return 0;
>  }
>  
> +#ifdef CONFIG_CGROUP_MEM_RES_CTLR_KMEM
> +static u64 kmem_limit_independent_read(struct cgroup *cont, struct cftype *cft)
> +{
> +	return mem_cgroup_from_cont(cont)->kmem_independent;
> +}
> +
> +static int kmem_limit_independent_write(struct cgroup *cont, struct cftype *cft,
> +					u64 val)
> +{
> +	cgroup_lock();
> +	mem_cgroup_from_cont(cont)->kmem_independent = !!val;
> +	cgroup_unlock();

Hm. This code allows that parent/child can have different settings.
Could you add parent-child check as..

"If parent sets use_hierarchy==1, children must have the same kmem_independent value
with parant's one."

How do you think ? I think a hierarchy must have the same config.


BTW...I don't like naming a little ;)

memory->consolidated/shared/?????_kmem_accounting ?
Or
memory->kmem_independent_accounting ?

or some better naming ?

Thanks,
-Kame

--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/