diff options
Diffstat (limited to 'Documentation/controllers')
| -rw-r--r-- | Documentation/controllers/memory.txt | 259 |
1 files changed, 259 insertions, 0 deletions
diff --git a/Documentation/controllers/memory.txt b/Documentation/controllers/memory.txt new file mode 100644 index 00000000000..7e27baacca7 --- /dev/null +++ b/Documentation/controllers/memory.txt @@ -0,0 +1,259 @@ +Memory Controller + +Salient features + +a. Enable control of both RSS (mapped) and Page Cache (unmapped) pages +b. The infrastructure allows easy addition of other types of memory to control +c. Provides *zero overhead* for non memory controller users +d. Provides a double LRU: global memory pressure causes reclaim from the + global LRU; a cgroup on hitting a limit, reclaims from the per + cgroup LRU + +NOTE: Page Cache (unmapped) also includes Swap Cache pages as a subset +and will not be referred to explicitly in the rest of the documentation. + +Benefits and Purpose of the memory controller + +The memory controller isolates the memory behaviour of a group of tasks +from the rest of the system. The article on LWN [12] mentions some probable +uses of the memory controller. The memory controller can be used to + +a. Isolate an application or a group of applications + Memory hungry applications can be isolated and limited to a smaller + amount of memory. +b. Create a cgroup with limited amount of memory, this can be used + as a good alternative to booting with mem=XXXX. +c. Virtualization solutions can control the amount of memory they want + to assign to a virtual machine instance. +d. A CD/DVD burner could control the amount of memory used by the + rest of the system to ensure that burning does not fail due to lack + of available memory. +e. There are several other use cases, find one or use the controller just + for fun (to learn and hack on the VM subsystem). + +1. History + +The memory controller has a long history. A request for comments for the memory +controller was posted by Balbir Singh [1]. At the time the RFC was posted +there were several implementations for memory control. The goal of the +RFC was to build consensus and agreement for the minimal features required +for memory control. The first RSS controller was posted by Balbir Singh[2] +in Feb 2007. Pavel Emelianov [3][4][5] has since posted three versions of the +RSS controller. At OLS, at the resource management BoF, everyone suggested +that we handle both page cache and RSS together. Another request was raised +to allow user space handling of OOM. The current memory controller is +at version 6; it combines both mapped (RSS) and unmapped Page +Cache Control [11]. + +2. Memory Control + +Memory is a unique resource in the sense that it is present in a limited +amount. If a task requires a lot of CPU processing, the task can spread +its processing over a period of hours, days, months or years, but with +memory, the same physical memory needs to be reused to accomplish the task. + +The memory controller implementation has been divided into phases. These +are: + +1. Memory controller +2. mlock(2) controller +3. Kernel user memory accounting and slab control +4. user mappings length controller + +The memory controller is the first controller developed. + +2.1. Design + +The core of the design is a counter called the res_counter. The res_counter +tracks the current memory usage and limit of the group of processes associated +with the controller. Each cgroup has a memory controller specific data +structure (mem_cgroup) associated with it. + +2.2. Accounting + + +--------------------+ + | mem_cgroup | + | (res_counter) | + +--------------------+ + / ^ \ + / | \ + +---------------+ | +---------------+ + | mm_struct | |.... | mm_struct | + | | | | | + +---------------+ | +---------------+ + | + + --------------+ + | + +---------------+ +------+--------+ + | page +----------> page_cgroup| + | | | | + +---------------+ +---------------+ + + (Figure 1: Hierarchy of Accounting) + + +Figure 1 shows the important aspects of the controller + +1. Accounting happens per cgroup +2. Each mm_struct knows about which cgroup it belongs to +3. Each page has a pointer to the page_cgroup, which in turn knows the + cgroup it belongs to + +The accounting is done as follows: mem_cgroup_charge() is invoked to setup +the necessary data structures and check if the cgroup that is being charged +is over its limit. If it is then reclaim is invoked on the cgroup. +More details can be found in the reclaim section of this document. +If everything goes well, a page meta-data-structure called page_cgroup is +allocated and associated with the page. This routine also adds the page to +the per cgroup LRU. + +2.2.1 Accounting details + +All mapped pages (RSS) and unmapped user pages (Page Cache) are accounted. +RSS pages are accounted at the time of page_add_*_rmap() unless they've already +been accounted for earlier. A file page will be accounted for as Page Cache; +it's mapped into the page tables of a process, duplicate accounting is carefully +avoided. Page Cache pages are accounted at the time of add_to_page_cache(). +The corresponding routines that remove a page from the page tables or removes +a page from Page Cache is used to decrement the accounting counters of the +cgroup. + +2.3 Shared Page Accounting + +Shared pages are accounted on the basis of the first touch approach. The +cgroup that first touches a page is accounted for the page. The principle +behind this approach is that a cgroup that aggressively uses a shared +page will eventually get charged for it (once it is uncharged from +the cgroup that brought it in -- this will happen on memory pressure). + +2.4 Reclaim + +Each cgroup maintains a per cgroup LRU that consists of an active +and inactive list. When a cgroup goes over its limit, we first try +to reclaim memory from the cgroup so as to make space for the new +pages that the cgroup has touched. If the reclaim is unsuccessful, +an OOM routine is invoked to select and kill the bulkiest task in the +cgroup. + +The reclaim algorithm has not been modified for cgroups, except that +pages that are selected for reclaiming come from the per cgroup LRU +list. + +2. Locking + +The memory controller uses the following hierarchy + +1. zone->lru_lock is used for selecting pages to be isolated +2. mem->lru_lock protects the per cgroup LRU +3. lock_page_cgroup() is used to protect page->page_cgroup + +3. User Interface + +0. Configuration + +a. Enable CONFIG_CGROUPS +b. Enable CONFIG_RESOURCE_COUNTERS +c. Enable CONFIG_CGROUP_MEM_CONT + +1. Prepare the cgroups +# mkdir -p /cgroups +# mount -t cgroup none /cgroups -o memory + +2. Make the new group and move bash into it +# mkdir /cgroups/0 +# echo $$ > /cgroups/0/tasks + +Since now we're in the 0 cgroup, +We can alter the memory limit: +# echo -n 6000 > /cgroups/0/memory.limit + +We can check the usage: +# cat /cgroups/0/memory.usage +25 + +The memory.failcnt field gives the number of times that the cgroup limit was +exceeded. + +4. Testing + +Balbir posted lmbench, AIM9, LTP and vmmstress results [10] and [11]. +Apart from that v6 has been tested with several applications and regular +daily use. The controller has also been tested on the PPC64, x86_64 and +UML platforms. + +4.1 Troubleshooting + +Sometimes a user might find that the application under a cgroup is +terminated. There are several causes for this: + +1. The cgroup limit is too low (just too low to do anything useful) +2. The user is using anonymous memory and swap is turned off or too low + +A sync followed by echo 1 > /proc/sys/vm/drop_caches will help get rid of +some of the pages cached in the cgroup (page cache pages). + +4.2 Task migration + +When a task migrates from one cgroup to another, it's charge is not +carried forward. The pages allocated from the original cgroup still +remain charged to it, the charge is dropped when the page is freed or +reclaimed. + +4.3 Removing a cgroup + +A cgroup can be removed by rmdir, but as discussed in sections 4.1 and 4.2, a +cgroup might have some charge associated with it, even though all +tasks have migrated away from it. If some pages are still left, after following +the steps listed in sections 4.1 and 4.2, check the Swap Cache usage in +/proc/meminfo to see if the Swap Cache usage is showing up in the +cgroups memory.usage counter. A simple test of swapoff -a and swapon -a +should free any pending Swap Cache usage. + +4.4 Choosing what to account -- Page Cache (unmapped) vs RSS (mapped)? + +The type of memory accounted by the cgroup can be limited to just +mapped pages by writing "1" to memory.control_type field + +echo -n 1 > memory.control_type + +5. TODO + +1. Add support for accounting huge pages (as a separate controller) +2. Improve the user interface to accept/display memory limits in KB or MB + rather than pages (since page sizes can differ across platforms/machines). +3. Make cgroup lists per-zone +4. Make per-cgroup scanner reclaim not-shared pages first +5. Teach controller to account for shared-pages +6. Start reclamation when the limit is lowered +7. Start reclamation in the background when the limit is + not yet hit but the usage is getting closer +8. Create per zone LRU lists per cgroup + +Summary + +Overall, the memory controller has been a stable controller and has been +commented and discussed quite extensively in the community. + +References + +1. Singh, Balbir. RFC: Memory Controller, http://lwn.net/Articles/206697/ +2. Singh, Balbir. Memory Controller (RSS Control), + http://lwn.net/Articles/222762/ +3. Emelianov, Pavel. Resource controllers based on process cgroups + http://lkml.org/lkml/2007/3/6/198 +4. Emelianov, Pavel. RSS controller based on process cgroups (v2) + http://lkml.org/lkml/2007/4/9/74 +5. Emelianov, Pavel. RSS controller based on process cgroups (v3) + http://lkml.org/lkml/2007/5/30/244 +6. Menage, Paul. Control Groups v10, http://lwn.net/Articles/236032/ +7. Vaidyanathan, Srinivasan, Control Groups: Pagecache accounting and control + subsystem (v3), http://lwn.net/Articles/235534/ +8. Singh, Balbir. RSS controller V2 test results (lmbench), + http://lkml.org/lkml/2007/5/17/232 +9. Singh, Balbir. RSS controller V2 AIM9 results + http://lkml.org/lkml/2007/5/18/1 +10. Singh, Balbir. Memory controller v6 results, + http://lkml.org/lkml/2007/8/19/36 +11. Singh, Balbir. Memory controller v6, http://lkml.org/lkml/2007/8/17/69 +12. Corbet, Jonathan, Controlling memory use in cgroups, + http://lwn.net/Articles/243795/ |