| Message ID | 20220712112238.18824-1-goliath@infraroot.at |
|---|---|
| Headers | show |
| Series | Backport MEMCG changes from v5.17 | expand |
On 7/12/22 07:22, David Oberhollenzer wrote: > This is a backport of Sebastian's MEMCG changes to v5.15. With these > patches applied, it is possible to use memory cgroups together > with PREEMPT_RT on v5.15, just like on v5.17. > > David Oberhollenzer (1): > Allow MEMCG on PREEMPT_RT > > Sebastian Andrzej Siewior (3): > mm/memcg: Disable threshold event handlers on PREEMPT_RT > mm/memcg: Protect per-CPU counter by disabling preemption on > PREEMPT_RT where needed. > mm/memcg: Add a local_lock_t for IRQ and TASK object. > > .../admin-guide/cgroup-v1/memory.rst | 2 + > init/Kconfig | 1 - > mm/memcontrol.c | 1264 +++++++++-------- > 3 files changed, 671 insertions(+), 596 deletions(-) > Hi David, Do you know if these patches will be merged into the 5.15 patchset? Thanks, Joe
On 2022-07-27 16:35:44 [-0400], Joseph Salisbury wrote: > Hi David, Hi, > Do you know if these patches will be merged into the 5.15 patchset? I'm going to look at these next week. Has this been tested? > Thanks, > > Joe Sebastian
On 7/29/22 12:14, Sebastian Andrzej Siewior wrote: > On 2022-07-27 16:35:44 [-0400], Joseph Salisbury wrote: >> Hi David, > Hi, > >> Do you know if these patches will be merged into the 5.15 patchset? > I'm going to look at these next week. Has this been tested? Thanks for the update, Sebastian! I have not tested the patches myself. There is an open Ubuntu kernel bug[0]. I can build a test kernel for the bug reporter and ask them to test. I will provide testing results to this thread. > >> Thanks, >> >> Joe > Sebastian [0] http://pad.lv/1978814
On 7/29/22 12:14, Sebastian Andrzej Siewior wrote: > On 2022-07-27 16:35:44 [-0400], Joseph Salisbury wrote: >> Hi David, > Hi, > >> Do you know if these patches will be merged into the 5.15 patchset? > I'm going to look at these next week. Has this been tested? If anyone is interested in testing these patches with the Ubuntu distro, I created a 5.15.39 based test kernel which is packaged as a .deb. This test kernel has the rt-42 patch set, and the four patches from David. This test kernel can be downloaded from: https://people.canonical.com/~jsalisbury/MEMCG_UNSUPPORTED_TEST_KERNEL/ This kernel will also be tested in an Ubuntu kernel bug[0]. The bug reporter will be testing if the patches resolve a bug that affects kubernetes, which is missing cgroup memory. However, the bug reporter will probably not be testing latency differences. That is something I could look into next week. Joe [0] http://pad.lv/1978814 > >> Thanks, >> >> Joe > Sebastian
On 8/1/22 14:17, Joseph Salisbury wrote: > > > On 7/29/22 12:14, Sebastian Andrzej Siewior wrote: >> On 2022-07-27 16:35:44 [-0400], Joseph Salisbury wrote: >>> Hi David, >> Hi, >> >>> Do you know if these patches will be merged into the 5.15 patchset? >> I'm going to look at these next week. Has this been tested? > If anyone is interested in testing these patches with the Ubuntu > distro, I created a 5.15.39 based test kernel which is packaged as a > .deb. This test kernel has the rt-42 patch set, and the four patches > from David. > This test kernel can be downloaded from: > https://people.canonical.com/~jsalisbury/MEMCG_UNSUPPORTED_TEST_KERNEL/ Also, the test kernel is AMD64. If anyone needs an ARM64 kernel, just let me know. > > This kernel will also be tested in an Ubuntu kernel bug[0]. The bug > reporter will be testing if the patches resolve a bug that affects > kubernetes, which is missing cgroup memory. However, the bug reporter > will probably not be testing latency differences. That is something I > could look into next week. > > Joe > > [0] http://pad.lv/1978814 >> >>> Thanks, >>> >>> Joe >> Sebastian >
I'm currently working through some conflicts when I merged Greg's v5.15.58 into the 5.15-rt stable tree, but I'd be very interesting in testing in your patch after I get that resolved. Clark On Mon, Aug 1, 2022 at 10:36 PM Joseph Salisbury <joseph.salisbury@canonical.com> wrote: > > > > On 8/1/22 14:17, Joseph Salisbury wrote: > > > > > > On 7/29/22 12:14, Sebastian Andrzej Siewior wrote: > >> On 2022-07-27 16:35:44 [-0400], Joseph Salisbury wrote: > >>> Hi David, > >> Hi, > >> > >>> Do you know if these patches will be merged into the 5.15 patchset? > >> I'm going to look at these next week. Has this been tested? > > If anyone is interested in testing these patches with the Ubuntu > > distro, I created a 5.15.39 based test kernel which is packaged as a > > .deb. This test kernel has the rt-42 patch set, and the four patches > > from David. > > This test kernel can be downloaded from: > > https://people.canonical.com/~jsalisbury/MEMCG_UNSUPPORTED_TEST_KERNEL/ > Also, the test kernel is AMD64. If anyone needs an ARM64 kernel, just > let me know. > > > > This kernel will also be tested in an Ubuntu kernel bug[0]. The bug > > reporter will be testing if the patches resolve a bug that affects > > kubernetes, which is missing cgroup memory. However, the bug reporter > > will probably not be testing latency differences. That is something I > > could look into next week. > > > > Joe > > > > [0] http://pad.lv/1978814 > >> > >>> Thanks, > >>> > >>> Joe > >> Sebastian > > >
On 2022-07-12 13:22:34 [+0200], David Oberhollenzer wrote: > This is a backport of Sebastian's MEMCG changes to v5.15. With these > patches applied, it is possible to use memory cgroups together > with PREEMPT_RT on v5.15, just like on v5.17. This isn't the series that was merged upstream: | 0001-mm-memcg-Revert-mm-memcg-optimize-user-context-objec.patch | 0002-mm-memcg-Disable-threshold-event-handlers-on-PREEMPT.patch | 0003-mm-memcg-Protect-per-CPU-counter-by-disabling-preemp.patch | 0004-mm-memcg-Opencode-the-inner-part-of-obj_cgroup_uncha.patch | 0005-mm-memcg-Protect-memcg_stock-with-a-local_lock_t.patch | 0006-mm-memcg-Disable-migration-instead-of-preemption-in-.patch | 0007-mm-memcg-Add-missing-counter-index-which-are-not-upd.patch | 0008-mm-memcg-Add-a-comment-regarding-the-release-obj.patch | mm-memcg-Only-perform-the-debug-checks-on-PREEMPT_RT.patch any reason why not backport those? Sebastian
Hi Sebastian, On 8/3/22 08:53, Sebastian Andrzej Siewior wrote: > On 2022-07-12 13:22:34 [+0200], David Oberhollenzer wrote: >> This is a backport of Sebastian's MEMCG changes to v5.15. With these >> patches applied, it is possible to use memory cgroups together >> with PREEMPT_RT on v5.15, just like on v5.17. > > This isn't the series that was merged upstream: > | 0001-mm-memcg-Revert-mm-memcg-optimize-user-context-objec.patch > | 0002-mm-memcg-Disable-threshold-event-handlers-on-PREEMPT.patch > | 0003-mm-memcg-Protect-per-CPU-counter-by-disabling-preemp.patch > | 0004-mm-memcg-Opencode-the-inner-part-of-obj_cgroup_uncha.patch > | 0005-mm-memcg-Protect-memcg_stock-with-a-local_lock_t.patch > | 0006-mm-memcg-Disable-migration-instead-of-preemption-in-.patch > | 0007-mm-memcg-Add-missing-counter-index-which-are-not-upd.patch > | 0008-mm-memcg-Add-a-comment-regarding-the-release-obj.patch > | mm-memcg-Only-perform-the-debug-checks-on-PREEMPT_RT.patch > > any reason why not backport those? > this patch set is based on the one Richard submitted in late June, but was asked to use the changes from v5.17 instead of v5.16. I was under the impression that this meant to use the state of the code in v5.17 instead, as some of the back ported code was refactored a bit further upstream. I tried to stick to Richards patch set, picking the equivalent changes in mm from the git history, leading up to the v5.17.1-rt17 tag in linux-rt-devel. So, except for the changes to make it work on v5.15.49-rt47 in linux-stable-rt, those patches should represent what ended up in 5.17.1-rt17, right? Greetings, David
On 2022-08-03 11:17:22 [+0200], David Oberhollenzer wrote: > Hi Sebastian, Hi David, > this patch set is based on the one Richard submitted in late > June, but was asked to use the changes from v5.17 instead > of v5.16. I was under the impression that this meant to use > the state of the code in v5.17 instead, as some of the back > ported code was refactored a bit further upstream. You refer to https://lore.kernel.org/all/1958751921.205825.1655985764383.JavaMail.zimbra@nod.at/T/#u > I tried to stick to Richards patch set, picking the equivalent > changes in mm from the git history, leading up to the v5.17.1-rt17 > tag in linux-rt-devel. So, except for the changes to make it work > on v5.15.49-rt47 in linux-stable-rt, those patches should represent > what ended up in 5.17.1-rt17, right? I pointed out the patches from the queue that ended upstream. After upstream's review a few things changed like the revert of the user/irq context and so on. For simplicity reasons I would prefer to stick with one solution and not add the intermediate patches, that I had in the queue before I was able to settle with upstream on something, to release that is maintained for a longer period. So any problems that pop in 5.15 should be same as in later releases. The patches I mentioned ended up in v5.18 and were part of the latest v5.17-RT releases including v5.17.1-rt17, yes. > Greetings, > > David Sebastian
This is a backport of Sebastian's MEMCG changes to v5.15. With these patches applied, it is possible to use memory cgroups together with PREEMPT_RT on v5.15, just like on v5.17. David Oberhollenzer (1): Allow MEMCG on PREEMPT_RT Sebastian Andrzej Siewior (3): mm/memcg: Disable threshold event handlers on PREEMPT_RT mm/memcg: Protect per-CPU counter by disabling preemption on PREEMPT_RT where needed. mm/memcg: Add a local_lock_t for IRQ and TASK object. .../admin-guide/cgroup-v1/memory.rst | 2 + init/Kconfig | 1 - mm/memcontrol.c | 1264 +++++++++-------- 3 files changed, 671 insertions(+), 596 deletions(-)