Re: [PATCH v5 10/16] mm: list_lru: allocate list_lru_one only when needed

[Roman Gushchin]

On Mon, Dec 20, 2021 at 04:56:43PM +0800, Muchun Song wrote:
> In our server, we found a suspected memory leak problem. The kmalloc-32
> consumes more than 6GB of memory. Other kmem_caches consume less than
> 2GB memory.
> 
> After our in-depth analysis, the memory consumption of kmalloc-32 slab
> cache is the cause of list_lru_one allocation.
> 
>   crash> p memcg_nr_cache_ids
>   memcg_nr_cache_ids = $2 = 24574
> 
> memcg_nr_cache_ids is very large and memory consumption of each list_lru
> can be calculated with the following formula.
> 
>   num_numa_node * memcg_nr_cache_ids * 32 (kmalloc-32)
> 
> There are 4 numa nodes in our system, so each list_lru consumes ~3MB.
> 
>   crash> list super_blocks | wc -l
>   952
> 
> Every mount will register 2 list lrus, one is for inode, another is for
> dentry. There are 952 super_blocks. So the total memory is 952 * 2 * 3
> MB (~5.6GB). But the number of memory cgroup is less than 500. So I
> guess more than 12286 containers have been deployed on this machine (I
> do not know why there are so many containers, it may be a user's bug or
> the user really want to do that). And memcg_nr_cache_ids has not been
> reduced to a suitable value. This can waste a lot of memory.

But on the other side you increase the size of struct list_lru_per_memcg,
so if number of cgroups is close to memcg_nr_cache_ids, we can actually
waste more memory. I'm not saying the change is not worth it, but would be
nice to add some real-world numbers.

Or it's all irrelevant and is done as a preparation to the conversion to xarray?
If so, please, make it clear.

Thanks!