On Thu, Jul 09, 2020 at 12:55:54PM +0800, Feng Tang wrote:
> On Tue, Jul 07, 2020 at 01:41:20PM +0800, Feng Tang wrote:
> > On Tue, Jul 07, 2020 at 12:00:09PM +0800, Huang, Ying wrote:
> > > Feng Tang <[email protected]> writes:
> > > 
> > > > On Mon, Jul 06, 2020 at 06:34:34AM -0700, Andi Kleen wrote:
> > > >> >      ret = proc_dointvec_minmax(table, write, buffer, lenp, ppos);
> > > >> > -    if (ret == 0 && write)
> > > >> > +    if (ret == 0 && write) {
> > > >> > +            if (sysctl_overcommit_memory == OVERCOMMIT_NEVER)
> > > >> > +                    schedule_on_each_cpu(sync_overcommit_as);
> > > >> 
> > > >> The schedule_on_each_cpu is not atomic, so the problem could still 
> > > >> happen
> > > >> in that window.
> > > >> 
> > > >> I think it may be ok if it eventually resolves, but certainly needs
> > > >> a comment explaining it. Can you do some stress testing toggling the
> > > >> policy all the time on different CPUs and running the test on
> > > >> other CPUs and see if the test fails?
> > > >
> > > > For the raw test case reported by 0day, this patch passed in 200 times
> > > > run. And I will read the ltp code and try stress testing it as you
> > > > suggested.
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >> The other alternative would be to define some intermediate state
> > > >> for the sysctl variable and only switch to never once the 
> > > >> schedule_on_each_cpu
> > > >> returned. But that's more complexity.
> > > >
> > > > One thought I had is to put this schedule_on_each_cpu() before
> > > > the proc_dointvec_minmax() to do the sync before 
> > > > sysctl_overcommit_memory
> > > > is really changed. But the window still exists, as the batch is
> > > > still the larger one. 
> > > 
> > > Can we change the batch firstly, then sync the global counter, finally
> > > change the overcommit policy?
> > 
> > These reorderings are really head scratching :)
> > 
> > I've thought about this before when Qian Cai first reported the warning
> > message, as kernel had a check: 
> > 
> >     VM_WARN_ONCE(percpu_counter_read(&vm_committed_as) <
> >                     -(s64)vm_committed_as_batch * num_online_cpus(),
> >                     "memory commitment underflow");
> > 
> > If the batch is decreased first, the warning will be easier/earlier to be
> > triggered, so I didn't brought this up when handling the warning message.
> > 
> > But it might work now, as the warning has been removed.
> 
> I tested the reorder way, and the test could pass in 100 times run. The
> new order when changing policy to OVERCOMMIT_NEVER:
>   1. re-compute the batch ( to the smaller one)
>   2. do the on_each_cpu sync
>   3. really change the policy to NEVER.
> 
> It solves one of previous concern, that after the sync is done on cpuX,
> but before the whole sync on all cpus are done, there is a window that
> the percpu-counter could be enlarged again.
> 
> IIRC Andi had concern about read side cost when doing the sync, my
> understanding is most of the readers (malloc/free/map/unmap) are using
> percpu_counter_read_positive, which is a fast path without involving lock.
> 
> As for the problem itself, I agree with Michal's point, that usually there
> is no normal case that will change the overcommit_policy too frequently.
> 
> The code logic is mainly in overcommit_policy_handler(), based on the
> previous sync fix. please help to review, thanks!
> 
> int overcommit_policy_handler(struct ctl_table *table, int write, void 
> *buffer,
>               size_t *lenp, loff_t *ppos)
> {
>       int ret;
> 
>       if (write) {
>               int new_policy;
>               struct ctl_table t;
> 
>               t = *table;
>               t.data = &new_policy;
>               ret = proc_dointvec_minmax(&t, write, buffer, lenp, ppos);
>               if (ret)
>                       return ret;
> 
>               mm_compute_batch(new_policy);
>               if (new_policy == OVERCOMMIT_NEVER)
>                       schedule_on_each_cpu(sync_overcommit_as);
>               sysctl_overcommit_memory = new_policy;
>       } else {
>               ret = proc_dointvec_minmax(table, write, buffer, lenp, ppos);
>       }
> 
>       return ret;
> }

Rather than having to indent those many lines, how about this?

t = *table;
t.data = &new_policy;
ret = proc_dointvec_minmax(table, write, buffer, lenp, ppos);
if (ret || !write)
        return ret;

mm_compute_batch(new_policy);
if (new_policy == OVERCOMMIT_NEVER)
        schedule_on_each_cpu(sync_overcommit_as);

sysctl_overcommit_memory = new_policy;
return ret;

Reply via email to