renegade-project/linux-next
2
0
Fork 0
mirror of https://github.com/edk2-porting/linux-next.git synced 2024-11-18 23:54:26 +08:00
Code

memcg: charge swapcache to proper memcg

Browse Source 
memcg_test.txt says at 4.1:

	This swap-in is one of the most complicated work. In do_swap_page(),
	following events occur when pte is unchanged.

	(1) the page (SwapCache) is looked up.
	(2) lock_page()
	(3) try_charge_swapin()
	(4) reuse_swap_page() (may call delete_swap_cache())
	(5) commit_charge_swapin()
	(6) swap_free().

	Considering following situation for example.

	(A) The page has not been charged before (2) and reuse_swap_page()
	    doesn't call delete_from_swap_cache().
	(B) The page has not been charged before (2) and reuse_swap_page()
	    calls delete_from_swap_cache().
	(C) The page has been charged before (2) and reuse_swap_page() doesn't
	    call delete_from_swap_cache().
	(D) The page has been charged before (2) and reuse_swap_page() calls
	    delete_from_swap_cache().

	    memory.usage/memsw.usage changes to this page/swp_entry will be
	 Case          (A)      (B)       (C)     (D)
         Event
       Before (2)     0/ 1     0/ 1      1/ 1    1/ 1
          ===========================================
          (3)        +1/+1    +1/+1     +1/+1   +1/+1
          (4)          -       0/ 0       -     -1/ 0
          (5)         0/-1     0/ 0     -1/-1    0/ 0
          (6)          -       0/-1       -      0/-1
          ===========================================
       Result         1/ 1     1/ 1      1/ 1    1/ 1

       In any cases, charges to this page should be 1/ 1.

In case of (D), mem_cgroup_try_get_from_swapcache() returns NULL
(because lookup_swap_cgroup() returns NULL), so "+1/+1" at (3) means
charges to the memcg("foo") to which the "current" belongs.
OTOH, "-1/0" at (4) and "0/-1" at (6) means uncharges from the memcg("baa")
to which the page has been charged.

So, if the "foo" and "baa" is different(for example because of task move),
this charge will be moved from "baa" to "foo".

I think this is an unexpected behavior.

This patch fixes this by modifying mem_cgroup_try_get_from_swapcache()
to return the memcg to which the swapcache has been charged if PCG_USED bit
is set.
IIUC, checking PCG_USED bit of swapcache is safe under page lock.

Signed-off-by: Daisuke Nishimura <nishimura@mxp.nes.nec.co.jp>
Cc: Balbir Singh <balbir@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
Cc: KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki <kamezawa.hiroyu@jp.fujitsu.com>
Cc: Li Zefan <lizf@cn.fujitsu.com>
Cc: Hugh Dickins <hugh@veritas.com>
Signed-off-by: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>
Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
This commit is contained in:
Daisuke Nishimura 2009-04-02 16:57:43 -07:00 committed by Linus Torvalds
parent 3918b96e03
commit 3c776e6466
1 changed files with 13 additions and 2 deletions
Show Stats Download Patch File Download Diff File Expand all files Collapse all files

15
mm/memcontrol.c
View File

@ -994,13 +994,24 @@ nomem:
static struct mem_cgroup *try_get_mem_cgroup_from_swapcache(struct page *page)
{
struct mem_cgroup *mem;
struct page_cgroup *pc;
swp_entry_t ent;
VM_BUG_ON(!PageLocked(page));
if (!PageSwapCache(page))
return NULL;
ent.val = page_private(page);
mem = lookup_swap_cgroup(ent);
pc = lookup_page_cgroup(page);
/*
* Used bit of swapcache is solid under page lock.
*/
if (PageCgroupUsed(pc))
mem = pc->mem_cgroup;
else {
ent.val = page_private(page);
mem = lookup_swap_cgroup(ent);
}
if (!mem)
return NULL;
if (!css_tryget(&mem->css))