lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2018]   [Mar]   [16]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
SubjectRe: [PATCH RFC] xfs, memcg: Call xfs_fs_nr_cached_objects() only in case of global reclaim
From
Date
On 16.03.2018 02:03, Dave Chinner wrote:
> On Thu, Mar 15, 2018 at 10:28:43PM +0300, Kirill Tkhai wrote:
>> On 15.03.2018 20:49, Michal Hocko wrote:
>>> On Thu 15-03-18 18:01:34, Kirill Tkhai wrote:
>>>> xfs_reclaim_inodes_count(XFS_M(sb)) does not care about memcg.
>>>> So, it's called for memcg reclaim too, e.g. this list is shrinked
>>>> disproportionality to another lists.
>>>>
>>>> This looks confusing, so I'm reporting about this.
>>>> Consider this patch as RFC.
>>>
>>> Could you be more specific about the problem you are trying to solve?
>>> Because we do skip shrinkers which are not memcg aware by
>>> shrink_slab:
>>> /*
>>> * If kernel memory accounting is disabled, we ignore
>>> * SHRINKER_MEMCG_AWARE flag and call all shrinkers
>>> * passing NULL for memcg.
>>> */
>>> if (memcg_kmem_enabled() &&
>>> !!memcg != !!(shrinker->flags & SHRINKER_MEMCG_AWARE))
>>> continue;
>>>
>>> Or am I missing something?
>>
>> sb->s_op->nr_cached_objects is a sub-method of generic super_cache_count().
>> super_cache_count() is owned and only called by superblock's shrinker,
>> which does have SHRINKER_MEMCG_AWARE flag.
>
> Xfs inodes are accounted to memcgs when they are allocated. All the
> memcg reclaim stuff is done at the VFS inode cache level - all the
> XFS inode cache shrinker does is clean up inodes that are not
> referenced by the VFS inode cache because the memcg aware reclaim
> has already freed them.
>
> i.e. what the XFS inode cache is doing is perfectly reasonable -
> memcg aware inode reclaim is occuring at the VFS level, but on XFS
> that does not free the inodes as they are still referenced
> internally by XFS. However, once the inode is removed from the VFS
> LRU, all memcg information about the inode is destroyed, so there's
> nothing in the XFS layers that cares about memcgs.

So, after inode is removed from LRU, memory still remains accounted
to memcg till the time they are actually freed. I personally don't
care, just to mention.

> Hence when the XFS inode shrinker then called to run a
> garbage collection pass on unreferenced inodes - the inodes that
> are now unreferenced in the memcg due to the VFS inode shrinker pass
> - it frees inodes regardless of the memcg context it was called from
> because that information is no longer present in the inode cache.
> Hence we just ignore memcgs at this level.

But xfs_fs_free_cached_objects() returns number of these freed object
as result to super_cache_scan(), so shrinker interprets them as related
to a memcg, while they may be related to another memcg. This introduces
a disproportion relatively to another shrinkers called to memcg.
Is there a problem? This is what my patch about.

> So, is there a problem you are actually trying to fix, or is this
> simply a "I don't understand how the superblock shrinkers work,
> please explain" patch?

I work on some shrinker changes, and just want to understand they don't
touch anything.

Kirill

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2018-03-16 09:56    [W:0.123 / U:0.292 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site