| Balbir Singh | 00f0b82 | 2008-03-04 14:28:39 -0800 | [diff] [blame] | 1 | Memory Resource Controller | 
|  | 2 |  | 
|  | 3 | NOTE: The Memory Resource Controller has been generically been referred | 
|  | 4 | to as the memory controller in this document. Do not confuse memory controller | 
|  | 5 | used here with the memory controller that is used in hardware. | 
| Balbir Singh | 1b6df3a | 2008-02-07 00:13:46 -0800 | [diff] [blame] | 6 |  | 
|  | 7 | Salient features | 
|  | 8 |  | 
|  | 9 | a. Enable control of both RSS (mapped) and Page Cache (unmapped) pages | 
|  | 10 | b. The infrastructure allows easy addition of other types of memory to control | 
|  | 11 | c. Provides *zero overhead* for non memory controller users | 
|  | 12 | d. Provides a double LRU: global memory pressure causes reclaim from the | 
|  | 13 | global LRU; a cgroup on hitting a limit, reclaims from the per | 
|  | 14 | cgroup LRU | 
|  | 15 |  | 
| KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki | dfc05c2 | 2008-02-07 00:14:41 -0800 | [diff] [blame] | 16 | NOTE: Swap Cache (unmapped) is not accounted now. | 
| Balbir Singh | 1b6df3a | 2008-02-07 00:13:46 -0800 | [diff] [blame] | 17 |  | 
|  | 18 | Benefits and Purpose of the memory controller | 
|  | 19 |  | 
|  | 20 | The memory controller isolates the memory behaviour of a group of tasks | 
|  | 21 | from the rest of the system. The article on LWN [12] mentions some probable | 
|  | 22 | uses of the memory controller. The memory controller can be used to | 
|  | 23 |  | 
|  | 24 | a. Isolate an application or a group of applications | 
|  | 25 | Memory hungry applications can be isolated and limited to a smaller | 
|  | 26 | amount of memory. | 
|  | 27 | b. Create a cgroup with limited amount of memory, this can be used | 
|  | 28 | as a good alternative to booting with mem=XXXX. | 
|  | 29 | c. Virtualization solutions can control the amount of memory they want | 
|  | 30 | to assign to a virtual machine instance. | 
|  | 31 | d. A CD/DVD burner could control the amount of memory used by the | 
|  | 32 | rest of the system to ensure that burning does not fail due to lack | 
|  | 33 | of available memory. | 
|  | 34 | e. There are several other use cases, find one or use the controller just | 
|  | 35 | for fun (to learn and hack on the VM subsystem). | 
|  | 36 |  | 
|  | 37 | 1. History | 
|  | 38 |  | 
|  | 39 | The memory controller has a long history. A request for comments for the memory | 
|  | 40 | controller was posted by Balbir Singh [1]. At the time the RFC was posted | 
|  | 41 | there were several implementations for memory control. The goal of the | 
|  | 42 | RFC was to build consensus and agreement for the minimal features required | 
|  | 43 | for memory control. The first RSS controller was posted by Balbir Singh[2] | 
|  | 44 | in Feb 2007. Pavel Emelianov [3][4][5] has since posted three versions of the | 
|  | 45 | RSS controller. At OLS, at the resource management BoF, everyone suggested | 
|  | 46 | that we handle both page cache and RSS together. Another request was raised | 
|  | 47 | to allow user space handling of OOM. The current memory controller is | 
|  | 48 | at version 6; it combines both mapped (RSS) and unmapped Page | 
|  | 49 | Cache Control [11]. | 
|  | 50 |  | 
|  | 51 | 2. Memory Control | 
|  | 52 |  | 
|  | 53 | Memory is a unique resource in the sense that it is present in a limited | 
|  | 54 | amount. If a task requires a lot of CPU processing, the task can spread | 
|  | 55 | its processing over a period of hours, days, months or years, but with | 
|  | 56 | memory, the same physical memory needs to be reused to accomplish the task. | 
|  | 57 |  | 
|  | 58 | The memory controller implementation has been divided into phases. These | 
|  | 59 | are: | 
|  | 60 |  | 
|  | 61 | 1. Memory controller | 
|  | 62 | 2. mlock(2) controller | 
|  | 63 | 3. Kernel user memory accounting and slab control | 
|  | 64 | 4. user mappings length controller | 
|  | 65 |  | 
|  | 66 | The memory controller is the first controller developed. | 
|  | 67 |  | 
|  | 68 | 2.1. Design | 
|  | 69 |  | 
|  | 70 | The core of the design is a counter called the res_counter. The res_counter | 
|  | 71 | tracks the current memory usage and limit of the group of processes associated | 
|  | 72 | with the controller. Each cgroup has a memory controller specific data | 
|  | 73 | structure (mem_cgroup) associated with it. | 
|  | 74 |  | 
|  | 75 | 2.2. Accounting | 
|  | 76 |  | 
|  | 77 | +--------------------+ | 
|  | 78 | |  mem_cgroup     | | 
|  | 79 | |  (res_counter)     | | 
|  | 80 | +--------------------+ | 
|  | 81 | /            ^      \ | 
|  | 82 | /             |       \ | 
|  | 83 | +---------------+  |        +---------------+ | 
|  | 84 | | mm_struct     |  |....    | mm_struct     | | 
|  | 85 | |               |  |        |               | | 
|  | 86 | +---------------+  |        +---------------+ | 
|  | 87 | | | 
|  | 88 | + --------------+ | 
|  | 89 | | | 
|  | 90 | +---------------+           +------+--------+ | 
|  | 91 | | page          +---------->  page_cgroup| | 
|  | 92 | |               |           |               | | 
|  | 93 | +---------------+           +---------------+ | 
|  | 94 |  | 
|  | 95 | (Figure 1: Hierarchy of Accounting) | 
|  | 96 |  | 
|  | 97 |  | 
|  | 98 | Figure 1 shows the important aspects of the controller | 
|  | 99 |  | 
|  | 100 | 1. Accounting happens per cgroup | 
|  | 101 | 2. Each mm_struct knows about which cgroup it belongs to | 
|  | 102 | 3. Each page has a pointer to the page_cgroup, which in turn knows the | 
|  | 103 | cgroup it belongs to | 
|  | 104 |  | 
|  | 105 | The accounting is done as follows: mem_cgroup_charge() is invoked to setup | 
|  | 106 | the necessary data structures and check if the cgroup that is being charged | 
|  | 107 | is over its limit. If it is then reclaim is invoked on the cgroup. | 
|  | 108 | More details can be found in the reclaim section of this document. | 
|  | 109 | If everything goes well, a page meta-data-structure called page_cgroup is | 
|  | 110 | allocated and associated with the page.  This routine also adds the page to | 
|  | 111 | the per cgroup LRU. | 
|  | 112 |  | 
|  | 113 | 2.2.1 Accounting details | 
|  | 114 |  | 
| KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki | 5b4e655 | 2008-10-18 20:28:10 -0700 | [diff] [blame] | 115 | All mapped anon pages (RSS) and cache pages (Page Cache) are accounted. | 
|  | 116 | (some pages which never be reclaimable and will not be on global LRU | 
|  | 117 | are not accounted. we just accounts pages under usual vm management.) | 
|  | 118 |  | 
|  | 119 | RSS pages are accounted at page_fault unless they've already been accounted | 
|  | 120 | for earlier. A file page will be accounted for as Page Cache when it's | 
|  | 121 | inserted into inode (radix-tree). While it's mapped into the page tables of | 
|  | 122 | processes, duplicate accounting is carefully avoided. | 
|  | 123 |  | 
|  | 124 | A RSS page is unaccounted when it's fully unmapped. A PageCache page is | 
|  | 125 | unaccounted when it's removed from radix-tree. | 
|  | 126 |  | 
|  | 127 | At page migration, accounting information is kept. | 
|  | 128 |  | 
|  | 129 | Note: we just account pages-on-lru because our purpose is to control amount | 
|  | 130 | of used pages. not-on-lru pages are tend to be out-of-control from vm view. | 
| Balbir Singh | 1b6df3a | 2008-02-07 00:13:46 -0800 | [diff] [blame] | 131 |  | 
|  | 132 | 2.3 Shared Page Accounting | 
|  | 133 |  | 
|  | 134 | Shared pages are accounted on the basis of the first touch approach. The | 
|  | 135 | cgroup that first touches a page is accounted for the page. The principle | 
|  | 136 | behind this approach is that a cgroup that aggressively uses a shared | 
|  | 137 | page will eventually get charged for it (once it is uncharged from | 
|  | 138 | the cgroup that brought it in -- this will happen on memory pressure). | 
|  | 139 |  | 
|  | 140 | 2.4 Reclaim | 
|  | 141 |  | 
|  | 142 | Each cgroup maintains a per cgroup LRU that consists of an active | 
|  | 143 | and inactive list. When a cgroup goes over its limit, we first try | 
|  | 144 | to reclaim memory from the cgroup so as to make space for the new | 
|  | 145 | pages that the cgroup has touched. If the reclaim is unsuccessful, | 
|  | 146 | an OOM routine is invoked to select and kill the bulkiest task in the | 
|  | 147 | cgroup. | 
|  | 148 |  | 
|  | 149 | The reclaim algorithm has not been modified for cgroups, except that | 
|  | 150 | pages that are selected for reclaiming come from the per cgroup LRU | 
|  | 151 | list. | 
|  | 152 |  | 
|  | 153 | 2. Locking | 
|  | 154 |  | 
|  | 155 | The memory controller uses the following hierarchy | 
|  | 156 |  | 
|  | 157 | 1. zone->lru_lock is used for selecting pages to be isolated | 
| KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki | dfc05c2 | 2008-02-07 00:14:41 -0800 | [diff] [blame] | 158 | 2. mem->per_zone->lru_lock protects the per cgroup LRU (per zone) | 
| Balbir Singh | 1b6df3a | 2008-02-07 00:13:46 -0800 | [diff] [blame] | 159 | 3. lock_page_cgroup() is used to protect page->page_cgroup | 
|  | 160 |  | 
|  | 161 | 3. User Interface | 
|  | 162 |  | 
|  | 163 | 0. Configuration | 
|  | 164 |  | 
|  | 165 | a. Enable CONFIG_CGROUPS | 
|  | 166 | b. Enable CONFIG_RESOURCE_COUNTERS | 
| Balbir Singh | 00f0b82 | 2008-03-04 14:28:39 -0800 | [diff] [blame] | 167 | c. Enable CONFIG_CGROUP_MEM_RES_CTLR | 
| Balbir Singh | 1b6df3a | 2008-02-07 00:13:46 -0800 | [diff] [blame] | 168 |  | 
|  | 169 | 1. Prepare the cgroups | 
|  | 170 | # mkdir -p /cgroups | 
|  | 171 | # mount -t cgroup none /cgroups -o memory | 
|  | 172 |  | 
|  | 173 | 2. Make the new group and move bash into it | 
|  | 174 | # mkdir /cgroups/0 | 
|  | 175 | # echo $$ >  /cgroups/0/tasks | 
|  | 176 |  | 
|  | 177 | Since now we're in the 0 cgroup, | 
|  | 178 | We can alter the memory limit: | 
| Balbir Singh | fb78922 | 2008-03-04 14:28:24 -0800 | [diff] [blame] | 179 | # echo 4M > /cgroups/0/memory.limit_in_bytes | 
| Balbir Singh | 0eea103 | 2008-02-07 00:13:57 -0800 | [diff] [blame] | 180 |  | 
|  | 181 | NOTE: We can use a suffix (k, K, m, M, g or G) to indicate values in kilo, | 
|  | 182 | mega or gigabytes. | 
|  | 183 |  | 
|  | 184 | # cat /cgroups/0/memory.limit_in_bytes | 
| Li Zefan | 2324c5d | 2008-02-23 15:24:12 -0800 | [diff] [blame] | 185 | 4194304 | 
| Balbir Singh | 0eea103 | 2008-02-07 00:13:57 -0800 | [diff] [blame] | 186 |  | 
|  | 187 | NOTE: The interface has now changed to display the usage in bytes | 
|  | 188 | instead of pages | 
| Balbir Singh | 1b6df3a | 2008-02-07 00:13:46 -0800 | [diff] [blame] | 189 |  | 
|  | 190 | We can check the usage: | 
| Balbir Singh | 0eea103 | 2008-02-07 00:13:57 -0800 | [diff] [blame] | 191 | # cat /cgroups/0/memory.usage_in_bytes | 
| Li Zefan | 2324c5d | 2008-02-23 15:24:12 -0800 | [diff] [blame] | 192 | 1216512 | 
| Balbir Singh | 0eea103 | 2008-02-07 00:13:57 -0800 | [diff] [blame] | 193 |  | 
|  | 194 | A successful write to this file does not guarantee a successful set of | 
|  | 195 | this limit to the value written into the file.  This can be due to a | 
|  | 196 | number of factors, such as rounding up to page boundaries or the total | 
|  | 197 | availability of memory on the system.  The user is required to re-read | 
|  | 198 | this file after a write to guarantee the value committed by the kernel. | 
|  | 199 |  | 
| Balbir Singh | fb78922 | 2008-03-04 14:28:24 -0800 | [diff] [blame] | 200 | # echo 1 > memory.limit_in_bytes | 
| Balbir Singh | 0eea103 | 2008-02-07 00:13:57 -0800 | [diff] [blame] | 201 | # cat memory.limit_in_bytes | 
| Li Zefan | 2324c5d | 2008-02-23 15:24:12 -0800 | [diff] [blame] | 202 | 4096 | 
| Balbir Singh | 1b6df3a | 2008-02-07 00:13:46 -0800 | [diff] [blame] | 203 |  | 
|  | 204 | The memory.failcnt field gives the number of times that the cgroup limit was | 
|  | 205 | exceeded. | 
|  | 206 |  | 
| KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki | dfc05c2 | 2008-02-07 00:14:41 -0800 | [diff] [blame] | 207 | The memory.stat file gives accounting information. Now, the number of | 
|  | 208 | caches, RSS and Active pages/Inactive pages are shown. | 
|  | 209 |  | 
|  | 210 | The memory.force_empty gives an interface to drop *all* charges by force. | 
|  | 211 |  | 
| Balbir Singh | fb78922 | 2008-03-04 14:28:24 -0800 | [diff] [blame] | 212 | # echo 1 > memory.force_empty | 
| KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki | dfc05c2 | 2008-02-07 00:14:41 -0800 | [diff] [blame] | 213 |  | 
|  | 214 | will drop all charges in cgroup. Currently, this is maintained for test. | 
|  | 215 |  | 
| Balbir Singh | 1b6df3a | 2008-02-07 00:13:46 -0800 | [diff] [blame] | 216 | 4. Testing | 
|  | 217 |  | 
|  | 218 | Balbir posted lmbench, AIM9, LTP and vmmstress results [10] and [11]. | 
|  | 219 | Apart from that v6 has been tested with several applications and regular | 
|  | 220 | daily use. The controller has also been tested on the PPC64, x86_64 and | 
|  | 221 | UML platforms. | 
|  | 222 |  | 
|  | 223 | 4.1 Troubleshooting | 
|  | 224 |  | 
|  | 225 | Sometimes a user might find that the application under a cgroup is | 
|  | 226 | terminated. There are several causes for this: | 
|  | 227 |  | 
|  | 228 | 1. The cgroup limit is too low (just too low to do anything useful) | 
|  | 229 | 2. The user is using anonymous memory and swap is turned off or too low | 
|  | 230 |  | 
|  | 231 | A sync followed by echo 1 > /proc/sys/vm/drop_caches will help get rid of | 
|  | 232 | some of the pages cached in the cgroup (page cache pages). | 
|  | 233 |  | 
|  | 234 | 4.2 Task migration | 
|  | 235 |  | 
|  | 236 | When a task migrates from one cgroup to another, it's charge is not | 
|  | 237 | carried forward. The pages allocated from the original cgroup still | 
|  | 238 | remain charged to it, the charge is dropped when the page is freed or | 
|  | 239 | reclaimed. | 
|  | 240 |  | 
|  | 241 | 4.3 Removing a cgroup | 
|  | 242 |  | 
|  | 243 | A cgroup can be removed by rmdir, but as discussed in sections 4.1 and 4.2, a | 
|  | 244 | cgroup might have some charge associated with it, even though all | 
| KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki | dfc05c2 | 2008-02-07 00:14:41 -0800 | [diff] [blame] | 245 | tasks have migrated away from it. Such charges are automatically dropped at | 
|  | 246 | rmdir() if there are no tasks. | 
| Balbir Singh | 1b6df3a | 2008-02-07 00:13:46 -0800 | [diff] [blame] | 247 |  | 
| Balbir Singh | 1b6df3a | 2008-02-07 00:13:46 -0800 | [diff] [blame] | 248 | 5. TODO | 
|  | 249 |  | 
|  | 250 | 1. Add support for accounting huge pages (as a separate controller) | 
| KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki | dfc05c2 | 2008-02-07 00:14:41 -0800 | [diff] [blame] | 251 | 2. Make per-cgroup scanner reclaim not-shared pages first | 
|  | 252 | 3. Teach controller to account for shared-pages | 
| KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki | 628f423 | 2008-07-25 01:47:20 -0700 | [diff] [blame] | 253 | 4. Start reclamation in the background when the limit is | 
| Balbir Singh | 1b6df3a | 2008-02-07 00:13:46 -0800 | [diff] [blame] | 254 | not yet hit but the usage is getting closer | 
| Balbir Singh | 1b6df3a | 2008-02-07 00:13:46 -0800 | [diff] [blame] | 255 |  | 
|  | 256 | Summary | 
|  | 257 |  | 
|  | 258 | Overall, the memory controller has been a stable controller and has been | 
|  | 259 | commented and discussed quite extensively in the community. | 
|  | 260 |  | 
|  | 261 | References | 
|  | 262 |  | 
|  | 263 | 1. Singh, Balbir. RFC: Memory Controller, http://lwn.net/Articles/206697/ | 
|  | 264 | 2. Singh, Balbir. Memory Controller (RSS Control), | 
|  | 265 | http://lwn.net/Articles/222762/ | 
|  | 266 | 3. Emelianov, Pavel. Resource controllers based on process cgroups | 
|  | 267 | http://lkml.org/lkml/2007/3/6/198 | 
|  | 268 | 4. Emelianov, Pavel. RSS controller based on process cgroups (v2) | 
| Li Zefan | 2324c5d | 2008-02-23 15:24:12 -0800 | [diff] [blame] | 269 | http://lkml.org/lkml/2007/4/9/78 | 
| Balbir Singh | 1b6df3a | 2008-02-07 00:13:46 -0800 | [diff] [blame] | 270 | 5. Emelianov, Pavel. RSS controller based on process cgroups (v3) | 
|  | 271 | http://lkml.org/lkml/2007/5/30/244 | 
|  | 272 | 6. Menage, Paul. Control Groups v10, http://lwn.net/Articles/236032/ | 
|  | 273 | 7. Vaidyanathan, Srinivasan, Control Groups: Pagecache accounting and control | 
|  | 274 | subsystem (v3), http://lwn.net/Articles/235534/ | 
| Li Zefan | 2324c5d | 2008-02-23 15:24:12 -0800 | [diff] [blame] | 275 | 8. Singh, Balbir. RSS controller v2 test results (lmbench), | 
| Balbir Singh | 1b6df3a | 2008-02-07 00:13:46 -0800 | [diff] [blame] | 276 | http://lkml.org/lkml/2007/5/17/232 | 
| Li Zefan | 2324c5d | 2008-02-23 15:24:12 -0800 | [diff] [blame] | 277 | 9. Singh, Balbir. RSS controller v2 AIM9 results | 
| Balbir Singh | 1b6df3a | 2008-02-07 00:13:46 -0800 | [diff] [blame] | 278 | http://lkml.org/lkml/2007/5/18/1 | 
| Li Zefan | 2324c5d | 2008-02-23 15:24:12 -0800 | [diff] [blame] | 279 | 10. Singh, Balbir. Memory controller v6 test results, | 
| Balbir Singh | 1b6df3a | 2008-02-07 00:13:46 -0800 | [diff] [blame] | 280 | http://lkml.org/lkml/2007/8/19/36 | 
| Li Zefan | 2324c5d | 2008-02-23 15:24:12 -0800 | [diff] [blame] | 281 | 11. Singh, Balbir. Memory controller introduction (v6), | 
|  | 282 | http://lkml.org/lkml/2007/8/17/69 | 
| Balbir Singh | 1b6df3a | 2008-02-07 00:13:46 -0800 | [diff] [blame] | 283 | 12. Corbet, Jonathan, Controlling memory use in cgroups, | 
|  | 284 | http://lwn.net/Articles/243795/ |