All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Michal Hocko <mhocko@kernel.org>
To: David Rientjes <rientjes@google.com>
Cc: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
	Minchan Kim <minchan@kernel.org>,
	Johannes Weiner <hannes@cmpxchg.org>,
	Mel Gorman <mgorman@techsingularity.net>,
	linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-mm@kvack.org
Subject: Re: [patch v2] mm, vmscan: avoid thrashing anon lru when free + file is low
Date: Tue, 2 May 2017 10:02:47 +0200	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20170502080246.GD14593@dhcp22.suse.cz> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <alpine.DEB.2.10.1705011432220.137835@chino.kir.corp.google.com>

On Mon 01-05-17 14:34:21, David Rientjes wrote:
[...]
> @@ -2204,8 +2204,17 @@ static void get_scan_count(struct lruvec *lruvec, struct mem_cgroup *memcg,
>  		}
>  
>  		if (unlikely(pgdatfile + pgdatfree <= total_high_wmark)) {
> -			scan_balance = SCAN_ANON;
> -			goto out;
> +			/*
> +			 * Force SCAN_ANON if there are enough inactive
> +			 * anonymous pages on the LRU in eligible zones.
> +			 * Otherwise, the small LRU gets thrashed.
> +			 */
> +			if (!inactive_list_is_low(lruvec, false, sc, false) &&
> +			    lruvec_lru_size(lruvec, LRU_INACTIVE_ANON, sc->reclaim_idx)
> +					>> sc->priority) {
> +				scan_balance = SCAN_ANON;
> +				goto out;
> +			}

I have already asked and my questions were ignored. So let me ask again
and hopefuly not get ignored this time. So Why do we need a different
criterion on anon pages than file pages? I do agree that blindly
scanning anon pages when file pages are low is very suboptimal but this
adds yet another heuristic without _any_ numbers. Why cannot we simply
treat anon and file pages equally? Something like the following

	if (pgdatfile + pgdatanon + pgdatfree > 2*total_high_wmark) {
		scan_balance = SCAN_FILE;
		if (pgdatfile < pgdatanon)
			scan_balance = SCAN_ANON;
		goto out;
	}

Also it would help to describe the workload which can trigger this
behavior so that we can compare numbers before and after this patch.
-- 
Michal Hocko
SUSE Labs

WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Michal Hocko <mhocko@kernel.org>
To: David Rientjes <rientjes@google.com>
Cc: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
	Minchan Kim <minchan@kernel.org>,
	Johannes Weiner <hannes@cmpxchg.org>,
	Mel Gorman <mgorman@techsingularity.net>,
	linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-mm@kvack.org
Subject: Re: [patch v2] mm, vmscan: avoid thrashing anon lru when free + file is low
Date: Tue, 2 May 2017 10:02:47 +0200	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20170502080246.GD14593@dhcp22.suse.cz> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <alpine.DEB.2.10.1705011432220.137835@chino.kir.corp.google.com>

On Mon 01-05-17 14:34:21, David Rientjes wrote:
[...]
> @@ -2204,8 +2204,17 @@ static void get_scan_count(struct lruvec *lruvec, struct mem_cgroup *memcg,
>  		}
>  
>  		if (unlikely(pgdatfile + pgdatfree <= total_high_wmark)) {
> -			scan_balance = SCAN_ANON;
> -			goto out;
> +			/*
> +			 * Force SCAN_ANON if there are enough inactive
> +			 * anonymous pages on the LRU in eligible zones.
> +			 * Otherwise, the small LRU gets thrashed.
> +			 */
> +			if (!inactive_list_is_low(lruvec, false, sc, false) &&
> +			    lruvec_lru_size(lruvec, LRU_INACTIVE_ANON, sc->reclaim_idx)
> +					>> sc->priority) {
> +				scan_balance = SCAN_ANON;
> +				goto out;
> +			}

I have already asked and my questions were ignored. So let me ask again
and hopefuly not get ignored this time. So Why do we need a different
criterion on anon pages than file pages? I do agree that blindly
scanning anon pages when file pages are low is very suboptimal but this
adds yet another heuristic without _any_ numbers. Why cannot we simply
treat anon and file pages equally? Something like the following

	if (pgdatfile + pgdatanon + pgdatfree > 2*total_high_wmark) {
		scan_balance = SCAN_FILE;
		if (pgdatfile < pgdatanon)
			scan_balance = SCAN_ANON;
		goto out;
	}

Also it would help to describe the workload which can trigger this
behavior so that we can compare numbers before and after this patch.
-- 
Michal Hocko
SUSE Labs

--
To unsubscribe, send a message with 'unsubscribe linux-mm' in
the body to majordomo@kvack.org.  For more info on Linux MM,
see: http://www.linux-mm.org/ .
Don't email: <a href=mailto:"dont@kvack.org"> email@kvack.org </a>

  reply	other threads:[~2017-05-02  8:03 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 38+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2017-04-18  0:06 [patch] mm, vmscan: avoid thrashing anon lru when free + file is low David Rientjes
2017-04-18  0:06 ` David Rientjes
2017-04-18  1:36 ` Minchan Kim
2017-04-18  1:36   ` Minchan Kim
2017-04-18 21:32   ` David Rientjes
2017-04-18 21:32     ` David Rientjes
2017-04-19  0:14     ` Minchan Kim
2017-04-19  0:14       ` Minchan Kim
2017-04-19 23:24       ` David Rientjes
2017-04-19 23:24         ` David Rientjes
2017-04-20  6:09         ` Minchan Kim
2017-04-20  6:09           ` Minchan Kim
2017-05-01 21:34           ` [patch v2] " David Rientjes
2017-05-01 21:34             ` David Rientjes
2017-05-02  8:02             ` Michal Hocko [this message]
2017-05-02  8:02               ` Michal Hocko
2017-05-02 20:41               ` David Rientjes
2017-05-02 20:41                 ` David Rientjes
2017-05-03  6:15                 ` Michal Hocko
2017-05-03  6:15                   ` Michal Hocko
2017-05-03  7:06                   ` Michal Hocko
2017-05-03  7:06                     ` Michal Hocko
2017-05-03  8:49                     ` Michal Hocko
2017-05-03  8:49                       ` Michal Hocko
2017-05-03 22:52                       ` David Rientjes
2017-05-03 22:52                         ` David Rientjes
2017-05-04 11:43                         ` Michal Hocko
2017-05-04 11:43                           ` Michal Hocko
2017-05-31 15:20             ` Michal Hocko
2017-05-31 15:20               ` Michal Hocko
2017-06-02 20:36             ` Andrew Morton
2017-06-02 20:36               ` Andrew Morton
2017-06-04 22:27               ` David Rientjes
2017-06-04 22:27                 ` David Rientjes
2017-04-19  7:04     ` [patch] " Michal Hocko
2017-04-19  7:04       ` Michal Hocko
2017-04-18  7:11 ` Michal Hocko
2017-04-18  7:11   ` Michal Hocko

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=20170502080246.GD14593@dhcp22.suse.cz \
    --to=mhocko@kernel.org \
    --cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
    --cc=hannes@cmpxchg.org \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
    --cc=mgorman@techsingularity.net \
    --cc=minchan@kernel.org \
    --cc=rientjes@google.com \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.