feat(sockmem-plugin): unified solution for TCP memory limitation #365

[lubinszARM]

What type of PR is this?
Features

What this PR does / why we need it:
The feature provides the unified solution for TCP memory limitation in cgroup and global level.

Which issue(s) this PR fixes:
In our production environment, there is a critical case where certain services heavily consumed tcpmem(cgroupv1 pods with default setting have unlimited tcpmem), causing the global tcpmem to reach the limitation. As a result, the network performance of the entire machine was crash.

Special notes for your reviewer:
The feature includes 3 parts:
1, Set global tcpmem limit by changing net.ipv4.tcp_mem.
The default value is 20% of host toal memory.
2, Do nothing under cgroupv2.
3, Set pod tcpmem limit under cgroupv1.
The default value is same with memory.limit_in_bytes.

[codecov]

Codecov Report

Attention: 82 lines in your changes are missing coverage. Please review.

Comparison is base (e333907) 53.31% compared to head (cd1f144) 53.49%.

Files	Patch %	Lines
...m-plugins/memory/handlers/sockmem/sockmem_linux.go	44.32%	50 Missing and 4 partials ⚠️
...qrm-plugins/memory/handlers/sockmem/utils_linux.go	77.50%	6 Missing and 3 partials ⚠️
...g/agent/qrm-plugins/memory/dynamicpolicy/policy.go	12.50%	6 Missing and 1 partial ⚠️
...md/katalyst-agent/app/options/qrm/memory_plugin.go	57.14%	6 Missing ⚠️
pkg/util/cgroup/manager/v1/fs_linux.go	0.00%	5 Missing and 1 partial ⚠️

Additional details and impacted files

@@            Coverage Diff             @@
##             main     #366      +/-   ##
==========================================
+ Coverage   53.31%   53.49%   +0.17%     
==========================================
  Files         437      439       +2     
  Lines       48155    48322     +167     
==========================================
+ Hits        25674    25848     +174     
+ Misses      19574    19553      -21     
- Partials     2907     2921      +14     

Flag	Coverage Δ
unittest	53.49% <50.89%> (+0.17%)	⬆️

Flags with carried forward coverage won't be shown. Click here to find out more.

☔ View full report in Codecov by Sentry.
📢 Have feedback on the report? Share it here.

[lubinszARM]

Hi @waynepeking348
I have reorged the codes based on the method of 'RegisterPeriodicalHandler'.

[waynepeking348]

will it be better for this strategy applied through cgroup manager or cri cc @csfldf

[lubinszARM]

@csfldf Any idea?

[csfldf]

can we move the registration code to DynamicPolicy.Start, and refine it like below:

if p.enableXxx {
err := periodicalhandler.RegisterPeriodicalHandler(...)

if err != nil {
return fmt.Error("xxx failed with error: %v", err);
}
}

[lubinszARM]

Done.

[waynepeking348]

pls DON'T close and reopen PR arbitrarily, we need to track the comments @lubinszARM