Commit 069c411d authored by Chunxin Zang's avatar Chunxin Zang Committed by Linus Torvalds

mm/vmscan: fix infinite loop in drop_slab_node

We have observed that drop_caches can take a considerable amount of
time (<put data here>).  Especially when there are many memcgs involved
because they are adding an additional overhead.

It is quite unfortunate that the operation cannot be interrupted by a
signal currently.  Add a check for fatal signals into the main loop so
that userspace can control early bailout.

There are two reasons:

1. We have too many memcgs, even though one object freed in one memcg,
   the sum of object is bigger than 10.

2. We spend a lot of time in traverse memcg once.  So, the memcg who
   traversed at the first have been freed many objects.  Traverse memcg
   next time, the freed count bigger than 10 again.

We can get the following info through 'ps':

  root:~# ps -aux | grep drop
  root  357956 ... R    Aug25 21119854:55 echo 3 > /proc/sys/vm/drop_caches
  root 1771385 ... R    Aug16 21146421:17 echo 3 > /proc/sys/vm/drop_caches
  root 1986319 ... R    18:56 117:27 echo 3 > /proc/sys/vm/drop_caches
  root 2002148 ... R    Aug24 5720:39 echo 3 > /proc/sys/vm/drop_caches
  root 2564666 ... R    18:59 113:58 echo 3 > /proc/sys/vm/drop_caches
  root 2639347 ... R    Sep03 2383:39 echo 3 > /proc/sys/vm/drop_caches
  root 3904747 ... R    03:35 993:31 echo 3 > /proc/sys/vm/drop_caches
  root 4016780 ... R    Aug21 7882:18 echo 3 > /proc/sys/vm/drop_caches

Use bpftrace follow 'freed' value in drop_slab_node:

  root:~# bpftrace -e 'kprobe:drop_slab_node+70 {@ret=hist(reg("bp")); }'
  Attaching 1 probe...
  ^B^C

  @ret:
  [64, 128)        1 |                                                    |
  [128, 256)      28 |                                                    |
  [256, 512)     107 |@                                                   |
  [512, 1K)      298 |@@@                                                 |
  [1K, 2K)       613 |@@@@@@@                                             |
  [2K, 4K)      4435 |@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@|
  [4K, 8K)       442 |@@@@@                                               |
  [8K, 16K)      299 |@@@                                                 |
  [16K, 32K)     100 |@                                                   |
  [32K, 64K)     139 |@                                                   |
  [64K, 128K)     56 |                                                    |
  [128K, 256K)    26 |                                                    |
  [256K, 512K)     2 |                                                    |

In the while loop, we can check whether the TASK_KILLABLE signal is set,
if so, we should break the loop.
Signed-off-by: default avatarChunxin Zang <zangchunxin@bytedance.com>
Signed-off-by: default avatarMuchun Song <songmuchun@bytedance.com>
Signed-off-by: default avatarAndrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>
Acked-by: default avatarChris Down <chris@chrisdown.name>
Acked-by: default avatarMichal Hocko <mhocko@suse.com>
Cc: Vlastimil Babka <vbabka@suse.cz>
Cc: Matthew Wilcox <willy@infradead.org>
Link: https://lkml.kernel.org/r/20200909152047.27905-1-zangchunxin@bytedance.comSigned-off-by: default avatarLinus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
parent 0bf7b64e
...@@ -699,6 +699,9 @@ void drop_slab_node(int nid) ...@@ -699,6 +699,9 @@ void drop_slab_node(int nid)
do { do {
struct mem_cgroup *memcg = NULL; struct mem_cgroup *memcg = NULL;
if (fatal_signal_pending(current))
return;
freed = 0; freed = 0;
memcg = mem_cgroup_iter(NULL, NULL, NULL); memcg = mem_cgroup_iter(NULL, NULL, NULL);
do { do {
......
Markdown is supported
0%
or
You are about to add 0 people to the discussion. Proceed with caution.
Finish editing this message first!
Please register or to comment