|  | Memory Resource Controller | 
|  |  | 
|  | NOTE: The Memory Resource Controller has been generically been referred | 
|  | to as the memory controller in this document. Do not confuse memory controller | 
|  | used here with the memory controller that is used in hardware. | 
|  |  | 
|  | 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: Swap Cache (unmapped) is not accounted now. | 
|  |  | 
|  | 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->per_zone->lru_lock protects the per cgroup LRU (per zone) | 
|  | 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_RES_CTLR | 
|  |  | 
|  | 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 4M > /cgroups/0/memory.limit_in_bytes | 
|  |  | 
|  | NOTE: We can use a suffix (k, K, m, M, g or G) to indicate values in kilo, | 
|  | mega or gigabytes. | 
|  |  | 
|  | # cat /cgroups/0/memory.limit_in_bytes | 
|  | 4194304 | 
|  |  | 
|  | NOTE: The interface has now changed to display the usage in bytes | 
|  | instead of pages | 
|  |  | 
|  | We can check the usage: | 
|  | # cat /cgroups/0/memory.usage_in_bytes | 
|  | 1216512 | 
|  |  | 
|  | A successful write to this file does not guarantee a successful set of | 
|  | this limit to the value written into the file.  This can be due to a | 
|  | number of factors, such as rounding up to page boundaries or the total | 
|  | availability of memory on the system.  The user is required to re-read | 
|  | this file after a write to guarantee the value committed by the kernel. | 
|  |  | 
|  | # echo 1 > memory.limit_in_bytes | 
|  | # cat memory.limit_in_bytes | 
|  | 4096 | 
|  |  | 
|  | The memory.failcnt field gives the number of times that the cgroup limit was | 
|  | exceeded. | 
|  |  | 
|  | The memory.stat file gives accounting information. Now, the number of | 
|  | caches, RSS and Active pages/Inactive pages are shown. | 
|  |  | 
|  | The memory.force_empty gives an interface to drop *all* charges by force. | 
|  |  | 
|  | # echo 1 > memory.force_empty | 
|  |  | 
|  | will drop all charges in cgroup. Currently, this is maintained for test. | 
|  |  | 
|  | 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. Such charges are automatically dropped at | 
|  | rmdir() if there are no tasks. | 
|  |  | 
|  | 5. TODO | 
|  |  | 
|  | 1. Add support for accounting huge pages (as a separate controller) | 
|  | 2. Make per-cgroup scanner reclaim not-shared pages first | 
|  | 3. Teach controller to account for shared-pages | 
|  | 4. Start reclamation in the background when the limit is | 
|  | not yet hit but the usage is getting closer | 
|  |  | 
|  | 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/2007/4/9/78 | 
|  | 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 test results, | 
|  | http://lkml.org/lkml/2007/8/19/36 | 
|  | 11. Singh, Balbir. Memory controller introduction (v6), | 
|  | http://lkml.org/lkml/2007/8/17/69 | 
|  | 12. Corbet, Jonathan, Controlling memory use in cgroups, | 
|  | http://lwn.net/Articles/243795/ |