Re: [PATCH -v2 2/6] memcg: cleanup charge routines

From: Michal Hocko
Date: Tue Feb 04 2014 - 11:12:42 EST


On Tue 04-02-14 11:05:09, Johannes Weiner wrote:
> On Tue, Feb 04, 2014 at 02:28:56PM +0100, Michal Hocko wrote:
[...]
> > +static bool current_bypass_charge(void)
> > +{
> > + /*
> > + * Unlike gloval-vm's OOM-kill, we're not in memory shortage
> > + * in system level. So, allow to go ahead dying process in addition to
> > + * MEMDIE process.
> > + */
> > + if (unlikely(test_thread_flag(TIF_MEMDIE)
> > + || fatal_signal_pending(current)))
> > + return true;
> > +
> > + return false;
> > +}
>
> I'd just leave it inline at this point, it lines up nicely with the
> other pre-charge checks in try_charge, which is at this point short
> enough to take this awkward 3-liner.

I can keep it inline of course. I thought having it out of line would
make it more obvious what are the bypass conditions. But as there is
still mem_cgroup_is_root then it is probably not the best thing to do.

> > +static int mem_cgroup_try_charge_memcg(gfp_t gfp_mask,
> > unsigned int nr_pages,
> > - struct mem_cgroup **ptr,
> > + struct mem_cgroup *memcg,
> > bool oom)
> > {
> > unsigned int batch = max(CHARGE_BATCH, nr_pages);
> > int nr_oom_retries = MEM_CGROUP_RECLAIM_RETRIES;
> > - struct mem_cgroup *memcg = NULL;
> > int ret;
> >
> > - /*
> > - * Unlike gloval-vm's OOM-kill, we're not in memory shortage
> > - * in system level. So, allow to go ahead dying process in addition to
> > - * MEMDIE process.
> > - */
> > - if (unlikely(test_thread_flag(TIF_MEMDIE)
> > - || fatal_signal_pending(current)))
> > + if (mem_cgroup_is_root(memcg) || current_bypass_charge())
> > goto bypass;
> >
> > if (unlikely(task_in_memcg_oom(current)))
> > goto nomem;
> >
> > + if (consume_stock(memcg, nr_pages))
> > + return 0;
> > +
> > if (gfp_mask & __GFP_NOFAIL)
> > oom = false;
> >
> > - /*
> > - * We always charge the cgroup the mm_struct belongs to.
> > - * The mm_struct's mem_cgroup changes on task migration if the
> > - * thread group leader migrates. It's possible that mm is not
> > - * set, if so charge the root memcg (happens for pagecache usage).
> > - */
> > - if (!*ptr && !mm)
> > - *ptr = root_mem_cgroup;
>
> [...]
>
> > /*
> > + * Charges and returns memcg associated with the given mm (or root_mem_cgroup
> > + * if mm is NULL). Returns NULL if memcg is under OOM.
> > + */
> > +static struct mem_cgroup *mem_cgroup_try_charge_mm(struct mm_struct *mm,
> > + gfp_t gfp_mask,
> > + unsigned int nr_pages,
> > + bool oom)
> > +{
> > + struct mem_cgroup *memcg;
> > + int ret;
> > +
> > + /*
> > + * We always charge the cgroup the mm_struct belongs to.
> > + * The mm_struct's mem_cgroup changes on task migration if the
> > + * thread group leader migrates. It's possible that mm is not
> > + * set, if so charge the root memcg (happens for pagecache usage).
> > + */
> > + if (!mm)
> > + goto bypass;
>
> Why shuffle it around right before you remove it anyway? Just start
> the series off with the patches that delete stuff without having to
> restructure anything, get those out of the way.

As mentioned in the previous email. I wanted to have this condition
removal bisectable. So it is removed in the next patch when it is
replaced by VM_BUG_ON.
--
Michal Hocko
SUSE Labs
--
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/