[lkml]   [2020]   [Feb]   [5]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
SubjectRe: [PATCH v11 1/9] hugetlb_cgroup: Add hugetlb_cgroup reservation counter
On 2/3/20 3:22 PM, Mina Almasry wrote:
> These counters will track hugetlb reservations rather than hugetlb
> memory faulted in. This patch only adds the counter, following patches
> add the charging and uncharging of the counter.
> This is patch 1 of an 9 patch series.
> Problem:
> Currently tasks attempting to reserve more hugetlb memory than is available get
> a failure at mmap/shmget time. This is thanks to Hugetlbfs Reservations [1].
> However, if a task attempts to reserve more hugetlb memory than its
> hugetlb_cgroup limit allows, the kernel will allow the mmap/shmget call, but
> will SIGBUS the task when it attempts to fault in the excess memory.
> We have users hitting their hugetlb_cgroup limits and thus we've been
> looking at this failure mode. We'd like to improve this behavior such that users
> violating the hugetlb_cgroup limits get an error on mmap/shmget time, rather
> than getting SIGBUS'd when they try to fault the excess memory in. This
> gives the user an opportunity to fallback more gracefully to
> non-hugetlbfs memory for example.
> The underlying problem is that today's hugetlb_cgroup accounting happens
> at hugetlb memory *fault* time, rather than at *reservation* time.
> Thus, enforcing the hugetlb_cgroup limit only happens at fault time, and
> the offending task gets SIGBUS'd.
> Proposed Solution:
> A new page counter named
> 'hugetlb.xMB.rsvd.[limit|usage|max_usage]_in_bytes'. This counter has
> slightly different semantics than
> 'hugetlb.xMB.[limit|usage|max_usage]_in_bytes':
> - While usage_in_bytes tracks all *faulted* hugetlb memory,
> rsvd.usage_in_bytes tracks all *reserved* hugetlb memory and
> hugetlb memory faulted in without a prior reservation.
> - If a task attempts to reserve more memory than limit_in_bytes allows,
> the kernel will allow it to do so. But if a task attempts to reserve
> more memory than rsvd.limit_in_bytes, the kernel will fail this
> reservation.
> This proposal is implemented in this patch series, with tests to verify
> functionality and show the usage.
> Alternatives considered:
> 1. A new cgroup, instead of only a new page_counter attached to
> the existing hugetlb_cgroup. Adding a new cgroup seemed like a lot of code
> duplication with hugetlb_cgroup. Keeping hugetlb related page counters under
> hugetlb_cgroup seemed cleaner as well.
> 2. Instead of adding a new counter, we considered adding a sysctl that modifies
> the behavior of hugetlb.xMB.[limit|usage]_in_bytes, to do accounting at
> reservation time rather than fault time. Adding a new page_counter seems
> better as userspace could, if it wants, choose to enforce different cgroups
> differently: one via limit_in_bytes, and another via rsvd.limit_in_bytes.
> This could be very useful if you're transitioning how hugetlb memory is
> partitioned on your system one cgroup at a time, for example. Also, someone
> may find usage for both limit_in_bytes and rsvd.limit_in_bytes concurrently,
> and this approach gives them the option to do so.
> Testing:
> - Added tests passing.
> - Used libhugetlbfs for regression testing.
> [1]:
> Signed-off-by: Mina Almasry <>
> Acked-by: David Rientjes <>
> ---
> Changes in v11:
> - Renamed resv.* or 'reservation' or 'reserved' to rsvd.*
> - Renamed hugetlb_cgroup_get_counter() to

I was mostly concerned about using 'resv' in cgroup file names visible to
users. Changing variable names is good as well.

Small nit, some lines of commit message wrap.

Reviewed-by: Mike Kravetz <>
Mike Kravetz

 \ /
  Last update: 2020-02-05 20:37    [W:0.228 / U:3.188 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site