Skip to content

8356868: Not all cgroup parameters are made available #25388

New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Conversation

caspernorrbin
Copy link
Member

@caspernorrbin caspernorrbin commented May 22, 2025

Hi everyone,

This PR improves cgroup support by exposing additional parameters that are currently not available. These parameters would enable more advanced features that rely on CPU and memory usage data.

The new parameters are:

  • CPU usage: cpuacct.usage (cgroup v1) and cpu.stat (cgroup v2), which allow precise tracking of consumed CPU time.

  • Peak memory usage: memory.peak (cgroup v2). While the cgroup v1 equivalent (memory.max_usage_in_bytes) was already available, cgroup v2 previously returned OSCONTAINER_ERROR — this has now been fixed.

  • Memory throttle limit: memory.high (cgroup v2). There is no direct equivalent in cgroup v1, but since most systems use cgroup v2, exposing this parameter enables finer-grained memory control for those systems.

Testing:

  • All container tests under /test/hotspot/jtreg/containers/
  • Manually inspected the new parameters in both cgroup v1 and v2 container environments with the relevant settings applied.

Progress

  • Change must be properly reviewed (1 review required, with at least 1 Reviewer)
  • Change must not contain extraneous whitespace
  • Commit message must refer to an issue

Issue

  • JDK-8356868: Not all cgroup parameters are made available (Enhancement - P4)

Reviewers

Reviewing

Using git

Checkout this PR locally:
$ git fetch https://git.openjdk.org/jdk.git pull/25388/head:pull/25388
$ git checkout pull/25388

Update a local copy of the PR:
$ git checkout pull/25388
$ git pull https://git.openjdk.org/jdk.git pull/25388/head

Using Skara CLI tools

Checkout this PR locally:
$ git pr checkout 25388

View PR using the GUI difftool:
$ git pr show -t 25388

Using diff file

Download this PR as a diff file:
https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/25388.diff

Using Webrev

Link to Webrev Comment

@bridgekeeper
Copy link

bridgekeeper bot commented May 22, 2025

👋 Welcome back cnorrbin! A progress list of the required criteria for merging this PR into master will be added to the body of your pull request. There are additional pull request commands available for use with this pull request.

@openjdk
Copy link

openjdk bot commented May 22, 2025

@caspernorrbin This change now passes all automated pre-integration checks.

ℹ️ This project also has non-automated pre-integration requirements. Please see the file CONTRIBUTING.md for details.

After integration, the commit message for the final commit will be:

8356868: Not all cgroup parameters are made available

Reviewed-by: sgehwolf, gziemski

You can use pull request commands such as /summary, /contributor and /issue to adjust it as needed.

At the time when this comment was updated there had been 511 new commits pushed to the master branch:

As there are no conflicts, your changes will automatically be rebased on top of these commits when integrating. If you prefer to avoid this automatic rebasing, please check the documentation for the /integrate command for further details.

➡️ To integrate this PR with the above commit message to the master branch, type /integrate in a new comment.

@openjdk openjdk bot changed the title 8356868 8356868: Not all cgroup parameters are made available May 22, 2025
@openjdk openjdk bot added the rfr Pull request is ready for review label May 22, 2025
@openjdk
Copy link

openjdk bot commented May 22, 2025

@caspernorrbin The following label will be automatically applied to this pull request:

  • hotspot-runtime

When this pull request is ready to be reviewed, an "RFR" email will be sent to the corresponding mailing list. If you would like to change these labels, use the /label pull request command.

@mlbridge
Copy link

mlbridge bot commented May 22, 2025

Webrevs

Copy link
Contributor

@jerboaa jerboaa left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

This looks fine to me. One suggestion as I think the cpu usage might be 0 and greater.

@openjdk openjdk bot added the ready Pull request is ready to be integrated label Jun 3, 2025
Co-authored-by: Severin Gehwolf <[email protected]>
@openjdk openjdk bot removed the ready Pull request is ready to be integrated label Jun 4, 2025
@caspernorrbin
Copy link
Member Author

This looks fine to me. One suggestion as I think the cpu usage might be 0 and greater.

Thank you for reviewing! Have changed the check to use >= instead.

@openjdk openjdk bot added the ready Pull request is ready to be integrated label Jun 4, 2025
Copy link

@gerard-ziemski gerard-ziemski left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

LGTM, though I did have one feedback.

Comment on lines +425 to +431
jlong CgroupV1CpuacctController::cpu_usage_in_micros() {
julong cpu_usage;
CONTAINER_READ_NUMBER_CHECKED(reader(), "/cpuacct.usage", "CPU Usage", cpu_usage);
// Output is in nanoseconds, convert to microseconds.
return (jlong)cpu_usage / 1000;
}

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Why don't we report the original value in nanos, if it is available?

This is new API, so no-one is using this yet, right?

Copy link
Member Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

I centered it around cgroup v2, which only reports the usage in micros. Cgroup v1 is deprecated for most systems so shouldn't really be used. It made more sense to use micros instead of padding the value most will see with a bunch of zeros.

@caspernorrbin
Copy link
Member Author

Thank you for the reviews. With no objections, I'll go ahead and integrate.

/integrate

@openjdk
Copy link

openjdk bot commented Jun 25, 2025

Going to push as commit 850bc20.
Since your change was applied there have been 558 commits pushed to the master branch:

Your commit was automatically rebased without conflicts.

@openjdk openjdk bot added the integrated Pull request has been integrated label Jun 25, 2025
@openjdk openjdk bot closed this Jun 25, 2025
@openjdk openjdk bot removed ready Pull request is ready to be integrated rfr Pull request is ready for review labels Jun 25, 2025
@openjdk
Copy link

openjdk bot commented Jun 25, 2025

@caspernorrbin Pushed as commit 850bc20.

💡 You may see a message that your pull request was closed with unmerged commits. This can be safely ignored.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
hotspot-runtime [email protected] integrated Pull request has been integrated
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

3 participants