[PATCH] ion: Consider ion pool pages as indirectly reclaimable

[PATCH] ion: Consider ion pool pages as indirectly reclaimable

[vjitta]

From: Vijayanand Jitta <vjitta@codeaurora.org>

An issue is observed where mallocs are failing due to overcommit failure.
The failure happens when there is high ION page pool since ION page
pool is not considered reclaimable by the overcommit calculation code.
This change considers ion pool pages as indirectly reclaimable and thus
accounted as available memory in the overcommit calculation.

Signed-off-by: Vijayanand Jitta <vjitta@codeaurora.org>
---
 drivers/staging/android/ion/ion_page_pool.c | 5 +++++
 1 file changed, 5 insertions(+)

diff --git a/drivers/staging/android/ion/ion_page_pool.c b/drivers/staging/android/ion/ion_page_pool.c
index db8f614..9bc56eb 100644
--- a/drivers/staging/android/ion/ion_page_pool.c
+++ b/drivers/staging/android/ion/ion_page_pool.c
@@ -32,6 +32,9 @@ static void ion_page_pool_add(struct ion_page_pool *pool, struct page *page)
 		list_add_tail(&page->lru, &pool->low_items);
 		pool->low_count++;
 	}
+
+	mod_node_page_state(page_pgdat(page), NR_INDIRECTLY_RECLAIMABLE_BYTES,
+			    (1 << (PAGE_SHIFT + pool->order)));
 	mutex_unlock(&pool->mutex);
 }
 
@@ -50,6 +53,8 @@ static struct page *ion_page_pool_remove(struct ion_page_pool *pool, bool high)
 	}
 
 	list_del(&page->lru);
+	mod_node_page_state(page_pgdat(page), NR_INDIRECTLY_RECLAIMABLE_BYTES,
+			    -(1 << (PAGE_SHIFT + pool->order)));
 	return page;
 }
 
-- 
1.9.1

_______________________________________________
devel mailing list
devel@linuxdriverproject.org
http://driverdev.linuxdriverproject.org/mailman/listinfo/driverdev-devel

Re: [PATCH] ion: Consider ion pool pages as indirectly reclaimable

[Laura Abbott]

On 04/24/2018 08:43 PM, vjitta@codeaurora.org wrote:
> From: Vijayanand Jitta <vjitta@codeaurora.org>
> 
> An issue is observed where mallocs are failing due to overcommit failure.
> The failure happens when there is high ION page pool since ION page
> pool is not considered reclaimable by the overcommit calculation code.
> This change considers ion pool pages as indirectly reclaimable and thus
> accounted as available memory in the overcommit calculation.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Vijayanand Jitta <vjitta@codeaurora.org>
> ---
>   drivers/staging/android/ion/ion_page_pool.c | 5 +++++
>   1 file changed, 5 insertions(+)
> 
> diff --git a/drivers/staging/android/ion/ion_page_pool.c b/drivers/staging/android/ion/ion_page_pool.c
> index db8f614..9bc56eb 100644
> --- a/drivers/staging/android/ion/ion_page_pool.c
> +++ b/drivers/staging/android/ion/ion_page_pool.c
> @@ -32,6 +32,9 @@ static void ion_page_pool_add(struct ion_page_pool *pool, struct page *page)
>   		list_add_tail(&page->lru, &pool->low_items);
>   		pool->low_count++;
>   	}
> +
> +	mod_node_page_state(page_pgdat(page), NR_INDIRECTLY_RECLAIMABLE_BYTES,
> +			    (1 << (PAGE_SHIFT + pool->order)));
>   	mutex_unlock(&pool->mutex);
>   }
>   
> @@ -50,6 +53,8 @@ static struct page *ion_page_pool_remove(struct ion_page_pool *pool, bool high)
>   	}
>   
>   	list_del(&page->lru);
> +	mod_node_page_state(page_pgdat(page), NR_INDIRECTLY_RECLAIMABLE_BYTES,
> +			    -(1 << (PAGE_SHIFT + pool->order)));
>   	return page;
>   }
>   
> 

I'm sure this fixes the problem but I don't think we want to
start throwing page adjustments into Ion. Why isn't this
memory already considered reclaimable by existing calculations?

Thanks,
Laura

Re: [PATCH] ion: Consider ion pool pages as indirectly reclaimable

[vjitta]

On 2018-04-25 21:17, Laura Abbott wrote:
> On 04/24/2018 08:43 PM, vjitta@codeaurora.org wrote:
>> From: Vijayanand Jitta <vjitta@codeaurora.org>
>> 
>> An issue is observed where mallocs are failing due to overcommit 
>> failure.
>> The failure happens when there is high ION page pool since ION page
>> pool is not considered reclaimable by the overcommit calculation code.
>> This change considers ion pool pages as indirectly reclaimable and 
>> thus
>> accounted as available memory in the overcommit calculation.
>> 
>> Signed-off-by: Vijayanand Jitta <vjitta@codeaurora.org>
>> ---
>>   drivers/staging/android/ion/ion_page_pool.c | 5 +++++
>>   1 file changed, 5 insertions(+)
>> 
>> diff --git a/drivers/staging/android/ion/ion_page_pool.c 
>> b/drivers/staging/android/ion/ion_page_pool.c
>> index db8f614..9bc56eb 100644
>> --- a/drivers/staging/android/ion/ion_page_pool.c
>> +++ b/drivers/staging/android/ion/ion_page_pool.c
>> @@ -32,6 +32,9 @@ static void ion_page_pool_add(struct ion_page_pool 
>> *pool, struct page *page)
>>   		list_add_tail(&page->lru, &pool->low_items);
>>   		pool->low_count++;
>>   	}
>> +
>> +	mod_node_page_state(page_pgdat(page), 
>> NR_INDIRECTLY_RECLAIMABLE_BYTES,
>> +			    (1 << (PAGE_SHIFT + pool->order)));
>>   	mutex_unlock(&pool->mutex);
>>   }
>>   @@ -50,6 +53,8 @@ static struct page *ion_page_pool_remove(struct 
>> ion_page_pool *pool, bool high)
>>   	}
>>     	list_del(&page->lru);
>> +	mod_node_page_state(page_pgdat(page), 
>> NR_INDIRECTLY_RECLAIMABLE_BYTES,
>> +			    -(1 << (PAGE_SHIFT + pool->order)));
>>   	return page;
>>   }
>> 
> 
> I'm sure this fixes the problem but I don't think we want to
> start throwing page adjustments into Ion. Why isn't this
> memory already considered reclaimable by existing calculations?
> 
> Thanks,
> Laura

You can refer to discussion here https://lkml.org/lkml/2018/3/5/361 
introducing
NR_INDIRECTLY_RECLAIMABLE_BYTES for the memory which is not currently 
considered
as reclaimable

Thanks,
Vijay
_______________________________________________
devel mailing list
devel@linuxdriverproject.org
http://driverdev.linuxdriverproject.org/mailman/listinfo/driverdev-devel

Re: [PATCH] ion: Consider ion pool pages as indirectly reclaimable

[vjitta]

On 2018-04-27 10:40, vjitta@codeaurora.org wrote:
> On 2018-04-25 21:17, Laura Abbott wrote:
>> On 04/24/2018 08:43 PM, vjitta@codeaurora.org wrote:
>>> From: Vijayanand Jitta <vjitta@codeaurora.org>
>>> 
>>> An issue is observed where mallocs are failing due to overcommit 
>>> failure.
>>> The failure happens when there is high ION page pool since ION page
>>> pool is not considered reclaimable by the overcommit calculation 
>>> code.
>>> This change considers ion pool pages as indirectly reclaimable and 
>>> thus
>>> accounted as available memory in the overcommit calculation.
>>> 
>>> Signed-off-by: Vijayanand Jitta <vjitta@codeaurora.org>
>>> ---
>>>   drivers/staging/android/ion/ion_page_pool.c | 5 +++++
>>>   1 file changed, 5 insertions(+)
>>> 
>>> diff --git a/drivers/staging/android/ion/ion_page_pool.c 
>>> b/drivers/staging/android/ion/ion_page_pool.c
>>> index db8f614..9bc56eb 100644
>>> --- a/drivers/staging/android/ion/ion_page_pool.c
>>> +++ b/drivers/staging/android/ion/ion_page_pool.c
>>> @@ -32,6 +32,9 @@ static void ion_page_pool_add(struct ion_page_pool 
>>> *pool, struct page *page)
>>>   		list_add_tail(&page->lru, &pool->low_items);
>>>   		pool->low_count++;
>>>   	}
>>> +
>>> +	mod_node_page_state(page_pgdat(page), 
>>> NR_INDIRECTLY_RECLAIMABLE_BYTES,
>>> +			    (1 << (PAGE_SHIFT + pool->order)));
>>>   	mutex_unlock(&pool->mutex);
>>>   }
>>>   @@ -50,6 +53,8 @@ static struct page *ion_page_pool_remove(struct 
>>> ion_page_pool *pool, bool high)
>>>   	}
>>>     	list_del(&page->lru);
>>> +	mod_node_page_state(page_pgdat(page), 
>>> NR_INDIRECTLY_RECLAIMABLE_BYTES,
>>> +			    -(1 << (PAGE_SHIFT + pool->order)));
>>>   	return page;
>>>   }
>>> 
>> 
>> I'm sure this fixes the problem but I don't think we want to
>> start throwing page adjustments into Ion. Why isn't this
>> memory already considered reclaimable by existing calculations?
>> 
>> Thanks,
>> Laura
> 
> You can refer to discussion here https://lkml.org/lkml/2018/3/5/361 
> introducing
> NR_INDIRECTLY_RECLAIMABLE_BYTES for the memory which is not currently 
> considered
> as reclaimable
> 
> Thanks,
> Vijay

There was also discussion specific to ion in that thread you can find it 
here
https://lkml.org/lkml/2018/4/25/642

Thanks,
Vijay
_______________________________________________
devel mailing list
devel@linuxdriverproject.org
http://driverdev.linuxdriverproject.org/mailman/listinfo/driverdev-devel

Re: [PATCH] ion: Consider ion pool pages as indirectly reclaimable

[Laura Abbott]

On 04/27/2018 02:29 AM, vjitta@codeaurora.org wrote:
> On 2018-04-27 10:40, vjitta@codeaurora.org wrote:
>> On 2018-04-25 21:17, Laura Abbott wrote:
>>> On 04/24/2018 08:43 PM, vjitta@codeaurora.org wrote:
>>>> From: Vijayanand Jitta <vjitta@codeaurora.org>
>>>>
>>>> An issue is observed where mallocs are failing due to overcommit failure.
>>>> The failure happens when there is high ION page pool since ION page
>>>> pool is not considered reclaimable by the overcommit calculation code.
>>>> This change considers ion pool pages as indirectly reclaimable and thus
>>>> accounted as available memory in the overcommit calculation.
>>>>
>>>> Signed-off-by: Vijayanand Jitta <vjitta@codeaurora.org>
>>>> ---
>>>>   drivers/staging/android/ion/ion_page_pool.c | 5 +++++
>>>>   1 file changed, 5 insertions(+)
>>>>
>>>> diff --git a/drivers/staging/android/ion/ion_page_pool.c b/drivers/staging/android/ion/ion_page_pool.c
>>>> index db8f614..9bc56eb 100644
>>>> --- a/drivers/staging/android/ion/ion_page_pool.c
>>>> +++ b/drivers/staging/android/ion/ion_page_pool.c
>>>> @@ -32,6 +32,9 @@ static void ion_page_pool_add(struct ion_page_pool *pool, struct page *page)
>>>>           list_add_tail(&page->lru, &pool->low_items);
>>>>           pool->low_count++;
>>>>       }
>>>> +
>>>> +    mod_node_page_state(page_pgdat(page), NR_INDIRECTLY_RECLAIMABLE_BYTES,
>>>> +                (1 << (PAGE_SHIFT + pool->order)));
>>>>       mutex_unlock(&pool->mutex);
>>>>   }
>>>>   @@ -50,6 +53,8 @@ static struct page *ion_page_pool_remove(struct ion_page_pool *pool, bool high)
>>>>       }
>>>>         list_del(&page->lru);
>>>> +    mod_node_page_state(page_pgdat(page), NR_INDIRECTLY_RECLAIMABLE_BYTES,
>>>> +                -(1 << (PAGE_SHIFT + pool->order)));
>>>>       return page;
>>>>   }
>>>>
>>>
>>> I'm sure this fixes the problem but I don't think we want to
>>> start throwing page adjustments into Ion. Why isn't this
>>> memory already considered reclaimable by existing calculations?
>>>
>>> Thanks,
>>> Laura
>>
>> You can refer to discussion here https://lkml.org/lkml/2018/3/5/361 introducing
>> NR_INDIRECTLY_RECLAIMABLE_BYTES for the memory which is not currently considered
>> as reclaimable
>>
>> Thanks,
>> Vijay
> 
> There was also discussion specific to ion in that thread you can find it here
> https://lkml.org/lkml/2018/4/25/642
> 
> Thanks,
> Vijay

Thanks for pointing that thread out. I'm still a little wary since
Ion is in staging but if the rest of mm are okay with it

Acked-by: Laura Abbott <labbott@redhat.com>

Thanks,
Laura

_______________________________________________
devel mailing list
devel@linuxdriverproject.org
http://driverdev.linuxdriverproject.org/mailman/listinfo/driverdev-devel