mbox series

[v6,00/34] bpf: switch to memcg-based memory accounting

Message ID 20201117025529.1034387-1-guro@fb.com (mailing list archive)
Headers show
Series bpf: switch to memcg-based memory accounting | expand

Message

Roman Gushchin Nov. 17, 2020, 2:54 a.m. UTC
Currently bpf is using the memlock rlimit for the memory accounting.
This approach has its downsides and over time has created a significant
amount of problems:

1) The limit is per-user, but because most bpf operations are performed
   as root, the limit has a little value.

2) It's hard to come up with a specific maximum value. Especially because
   the counter is shared with non-bpf users (e.g. memlock() users).
   Any specific value is either too low and creates false failures
   or too high and useless.

3) Charging is not connected to the actual memory allocation. Bpf code
   should manually calculate the estimated cost and precharge the counter,
   and then take care of uncharging, including all fail paths.
   It adds to the code complexity and makes it easy to leak a charge.

4) There is no simple way of getting the current value of the counter.
   We've used drgn for it, but it's far from being convenient.

5) Cryptic -EPERM is returned on exceeding the limit. Libbpf even had
   a function to "explain" this case for users.

In order to overcome these problems let's switch to the memcg-based
memory accounting of bpf objects. With the recent addition of the percpu
memory accounting, now it's possible to provide a comprehensive accounting
of the memory used by bpf programs and maps.

This approach has the following advantages:
1) The limit is per-cgroup and hierarchical. It's way more flexible and allows
   a better control over memory usage by different workloads. Of course, it
   requires enabled cgroups and kernel memory accounting and properly configured
   cgroup tree, but it's a default configuration for a modern Linux system.

2) The actual memory consumption is taken into account. It happens automatically
   on the allocation time if __GFP_ACCOUNT flags is passed. Uncharging is also
   performed automatically on releasing the memory. So the code on the bpf side
   becomes simpler and safer.

3) There is a simple way to get the current value and statistics.

In general, if a process performs a bpf operation (e.g. creates or updates
a map), it's memory cgroup is charged. However map updates performed from
an interrupt context are charged to the memory cgroup which contained
the process, which created the map.

Providing a 1:1 replacement for the rlimit-based memory accounting is
a non-goal of this patchset. Users and memory cgroups are completely
orthogonal, so it's not possible even in theory.
Memcg-based memory accounting requires a properly configured cgroup tree
to be actually useful. However, it's the way how the memory is managed
on a modern Linux system.


The patchset consists of the following parts:
1) 4 mm patches, which are already in the mm tree, but are required
   to avoid a regression (otherwise vmallocs cannot be mapped to userspace).
2) memcg-based accounting for various bpf objects: progs and maps
3) removal of the rlimit-based accounting
4) removal of rlimit adjustments in userspace samples

First 4 patches are not supposed to be merged via the bpf tree. I'm including
them to make sure bpf tests will pass.

v6:
  - rebased to the latest version of the remote charging API
  - fixed signatures, added acks

v5:
  - rebased to the latest version of the remote charging API
  - implemented kmem accounting from an interrupt context, by Shakeel
  - rebased to latest changes in mm allowed to map vmallocs to userspace
  - fixed a build issue in kselftests, by Alexei
  - fixed a use-after-free bug in bpf_map_free_deferred()
  - added bpf line info coverage, by Shakeel
  - split bpf map charging preparations into a separate patch

v4:
  - covered allocations made from an interrupt context, by Daniel
  - added some clarifications to the cover letter

v3:
  - droped the userspace part for further discussions/refinements,
    by Andrii and Song

v2:
  - fixed build issue, caused by the remaining rlimit-based accounting
    for sockhash maps


Roman Gushchin (34):
  mm: memcontrol: use helpers to read page's memcg data
  mm: memcontrol/slab: use helpers to access slab page's memcg_data
  mm: introduce page memcg flags
  mm: convert page kmemcg type to a page memcg flag
  bpf: memcg-based memory accounting for bpf progs
  bpf: prepare for memcg-based memory accounting for bpf maps
  bpf: memcg-based memory accounting for bpf maps
  bpf: refine memcg-based memory accounting for arraymap maps
  bpf: refine memcg-based memory accounting for cpumap maps
  bpf: memcg-based memory accounting for cgroup storage maps
  bpf: refine memcg-based memory accounting for devmap maps
  bpf: refine memcg-based memory accounting for hashtab maps
  bpf: memcg-based memory accounting for lpm_trie maps
  bpf: memcg-based memory accounting for bpf ringbuffer
  bpf: memcg-based memory accounting for bpf local storage maps
  bpf: refine memcg-based memory accounting for sockmap and sockhash
    maps
  bpf: refine memcg-based memory accounting for xskmap maps
  bpf: eliminate rlimit-based memory accounting for arraymap maps
  bpf: eliminate rlimit-based memory accounting for bpf_struct_ops maps
  bpf: eliminate rlimit-based memory accounting for cpumap maps
  bpf: eliminate rlimit-based memory accounting for cgroup storage maps
  bpf: eliminate rlimit-based memory accounting for devmap maps
  bpf: eliminate rlimit-based memory accounting for hashtab maps
  bpf: eliminate rlimit-based memory accounting for lpm_trie maps
  bpf: eliminate rlimit-based memory accounting for queue_stack_maps
    maps
  bpf: eliminate rlimit-based memory accounting for reuseport_array maps
  bpf: eliminate rlimit-based memory accounting for bpf ringbuffer
  bpf: eliminate rlimit-based memory accounting for sockmap and sockhash
    maps
  bpf: eliminate rlimit-based memory accounting for stackmap maps
  bpf: eliminate rlimit-based memory accounting for xskmap maps
  bpf: eliminate rlimit-based memory accounting for bpf local storage
    maps
  bpf: eliminate rlimit-based memory accounting infra for bpf maps
  bpf: eliminate rlimit-based memory accounting for bpf progs
  bpf: samples: do not touch RLIMIT_MEMLOCK

 fs/buffer.c                                   |   2 +-
 fs/iomap/buffered-io.c                        |   2 +-
 include/linux/bpf.h                           |  27 +--
 include/linux/memcontrol.h                    | 215 +++++++++++++++++-
 include/linux/mm.h                            |  22 --
 include/linux/mm_types.h                      |   5 +-
 include/linux/page-flags.h                    |  11 +-
 include/trace/events/writeback.h              |   2 +-
 kernel/bpf/arraymap.c                         |  30 +--
 kernel/bpf/bpf_local_storage.c                |  18 +-
 kernel/bpf/bpf_struct_ops.c                   |  19 +-
 kernel/bpf/core.c                             |  22 +-
 kernel/bpf/cpumap.c                           |  20 +-
 kernel/bpf/devmap.c                           |  23 +-
 kernel/bpf/hashtab.c                          |  33 +--
 kernel/bpf/helpers.c                          |  37 ++-
 kernel/bpf/local_storage.c                    |  38 +---
 kernel/bpf/lpm_trie.c                         |  17 +-
 kernel/bpf/queue_stack_maps.c                 |  16 +-
 kernel/bpf/reuseport_array.c                  |  12 +-
 kernel/bpf/ringbuf.c                          |  33 +--
 kernel/bpf/stackmap.c                         |  16 +-
 kernel/bpf/syscall.c                          | 177 ++++----------
 kernel/fork.c                                 |   7 +-
 mm/debug.c                                    |   4 +-
 mm/huge_memory.c                              |   4 +-
 mm/memcontrol.c                               | 139 +++++------
 mm/page_alloc.c                               |   8 +-
 mm/page_io.c                                  |   6 +-
 mm/slab.h                                     |  38 +---
 mm/workingset.c                               |   2 +-
 net/core/bpf_sk_storage.c                     |   2 +-
 net/core/sock_map.c                           |  40 +---
 net/xdp/xskmap.c                              |  15 +-
 samples/bpf/map_perf_test_user.c              |   6 -
 samples/bpf/offwaketime_user.c                |   6 -
 samples/bpf/sockex2_user.c                    |   2 -
 samples/bpf/sockex3_user.c                    |   2 -
 samples/bpf/spintest_user.c                   |   6 -
 samples/bpf/syscall_tp_user.c                 |   2 -
 samples/bpf/task_fd_query_user.c              |   5 -
 samples/bpf/test_lru_dist.c                   |   3 -
 samples/bpf/test_map_in_map_user.c            |   6 -
 samples/bpf/test_overhead_user.c              |   2 -
 samples/bpf/trace_event_user.c                |   2 -
 samples/bpf/tracex2_user.c                    |   6 -
 samples/bpf/tracex3_user.c                    |   6 -
 samples/bpf/tracex4_user.c                    |   6 -
 samples/bpf/tracex5_user.c                    |   3 -
 samples/bpf/tracex6_user.c                    |   3 -
 samples/bpf/xdp1_user.c                       |   6 -
 samples/bpf/xdp_adjust_tail_user.c            |   6 -
 samples/bpf/xdp_monitor_user.c                |   5 -
 samples/bpf/xdp_redirect_cpu_user.c           |   6 -
 samples/bpf/xdp_redirect_map_user.c           |   6 -
 samples/bpf/xdp_redirect_user.c               |   6 -
 samples/bpf/xdp_router_ipv4_user.c            |   6 -
 samples/bpf/xdp_rxq_info_user.c               |   6 -
 samples/bpf/xdp_sample_pkts_user.c            |   6 -
 samples/bpf/xdp_tx_iptunnel_user.c            |   6 -
 samples/bpf/xdpsock_user.c                    |   7 -
 .../selftests/bpf/progs/bpf_iter_bpf_map.c    |   2 +-
 .../selftests/bpf/progs/map_ptr_kern.c        |   7 -
 63 files changed, 460 insertions(+), 743 deletions(-)

Comments

Roman Gushchin Nov. 17, 2020, 3:42 a.m. UTC | #1
On Mon, Nov 16, 2020 at 06:54:55PM -0800, Roman Gushchin wrote:
> Currently bpf is using the memlock rlimit for the memory accounting.
> This approach has its downsides and over time has created a significant
> amount of problems:
> 

I'm sorry, I've missed the "bpf-next" prefix in the subject.
Resending.

Thanks!