All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Nikolay Borisov <nborisov@suse.com>
To: Dave Chinner <david@fromorbit.com>, linux-xfs@vger.kernel.org
Cc: linux-mm@kvack.org, linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 03/24] mm: factor shrinker work calculations
Date: Fri, 2 Aug 2019 18:08:37 +0300	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <e07bf57b-a9cb-cb7b-b2be-3ec1b355a184@suse.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20190801021752.4986-4-david@fromorbit.com>



On 1.08.19 г. 5:17 ч., Dave Chinner wrote:
> From: Dave Chinner <dchinner@redhat.com>
> 
> Start to clean up the shrinker code by factoring out the calculation
> that determines how much work to do. This separates the calculation
> from clamping and other adjustments that are done before the
> shrinker work is run.
> 
> Also convert the calculation for the amount of work to be done to
> use 64 bit logic so we don't have to keep jumping through hoops to
> keep calculations within 32 bits on 32 bit systems.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Dave Chinner <dchinner@redhat.com>
> ---
>  mm/vmscan.c | 74 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++-------------------
>  1 file changed, 47 insertions(+), 27 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/mm/vmscan.c b/mm/vmscan.c
> index ae3035fe94bc..b7472953b0e6 100644
> --- a/mm/vmscan.c
> +++ b/mm/vmscan.c
> @@ -464,13 +464,45 @@ EXPORT_SYMBOL(unregister_shrinker);
>  
>  #define SHRINK_BATCH 128
>  
> +/*
> + * Calculate the number of new objects to scan this time around. Return
> + * the work to be done. If there are freeable objects, return that number in
> + * @freeable_objects.
> + */
> +static int64_t shrink_scan_count(struct shrink_control *shrinkctl,
> +			    struct shrinker *shrinker, int priority,
> +			    int64_t *freeable_objects)

nit: make the return parm definition also uin64_t, also we have u64 types.

> +{
> +	uint64_t delta;
> +	uint64_t freeable;
> +
> +	freeable = shrinker->count_objects(shrinker, shrinkctl);
> +	if (freeable == 0 || freeable == SHRINK_EMPTY)
> +		return freeable;
> +
> +	if (shrinker->seeks) {
> +		delta = freeable >> (priority - 2);
> +		do_div(delta, shrinker->seeks);

a comment about the reasoning behind this calculation would be nice.

> +	} else {
> +		/*
> +		 * These objects don't require any IO to create. Trim
> +		 * them aggressively under memory pressure to keep
> +		 * them from causing refetches in the IO caches.
> +		 */
> +		delta = freeable / 2;
> +	}
> +
> +	*freeable_objects = freeable;
> +	return delta > 0 ? delta : 0;
> +}
> +
>  static unsigned long do_shrink_slab(struct shrink_control *shrinkctl,
>  				    struct shrinker *shrinker, int priority)
>  {
>  	unsigned long freed = 0;
> -	unsigned long long delta;
>  	long total_scan;
> -	long freeable;
> +	int64_t freeable_objects = 0;
> +	int64_t scan_count;

why int and not uint64 ? We can never have negative object count, right?

>  	long nr;
>  	long new_nr;
>  	int nid = shrinkctl->nid;
> @@ -481,9 +513,10 @@ static unsigned long do_shrink_slab(struct shrink_control *shrinkctl,
>  	if (!(shrinker->flags & SHRINKER_NUMA_AWARE))
>  		nid = 0;
>  
> -	freeable = shrinker->count_objects(shrinker, shrinkctl);
> -	if (freeable == 0 || freeable == SHRINK_EMPTY)
> -		return freeable;
> +	scan_count = shrink_scan_count(shrinkctl, shrinker, priority,
> +					&freeable_objects);
> +	if (scan_count == 0 || scan_count == SHRINK_EMPTY)
> +		return scan_count;
>  
>  	/*
>  	 * copy the current shrinker scan count into a local variable
> @@ -492,25 +525,11 @@ static unsigned long do_shrink_slab(struct shrink_control *shrinkctl,
>  	 */
>  	nr = atomic_long_xchg(&shrinker->nr_deferred[nid], 0);
>  
> -	total_scan = nr;
> -	if (shrinker->seeks) {
> -		delta = freeable >> priority;
> -		delta *= 4;
> -		do_div(delta, shrinker->seeks);
> -	} else {
> -		/*
> -		 * These objects don't require any IO to create. Trim
> -		 * them aggressively under memory pressure to keep
> -		 * them from causing refetches in the IO caches.
> -		 */
> -		delta = freeable / 2;
> -	}
> -
> -	total_scan += delta;
> +	total_scan = nr + scan_count;
>  	if (total_scan < 0) {
>  		pr_err("shrink_slab: %pS negative objects to delete nr=%ld\n",
>  		       shrinker->scan_objects, total_scan);
> -		total_scan = freeable;
> +		total_scan = scan_count;
>  		next_deferred = nr;
>  	} else
>  		next_deferred = total_scan;
> @@ -527,19 +546,20 @@ static unsigned long do_shrink_slab(struct shrink_control *shrinkctl,
>  	 * Hence only allow the shrinker to scan the entire cache when
>  	 * a large delta change is calculated directly.
>  	 */
> -	if (delta < freeable / 4)
> -		total_scan = min(total_scan, freeable / 2);
> +	if (scan_count < freeable_objects / 4)
> +		total_scan = min_t(long, total_scan, freeable_objects / 2);
>  
>  	/*
>  	 * Avoid risking looping forever due to too large nr value:
>  	 * never try to free more than twice the estimate number of
>  	 * freeable entries.
>  	 */
> -	if (total_scan > freeable * 2)
> -		total_scan = freeable * 2;
> +	if (total_scan > freeable_objects * 2)
> +		total_scan = freeable_objects * 2;
>  
>  	trace_mm_shrink_slab_start(shrinker, shrinkctl, nr,
> -				   freeable, delta, total_scan, priority);
> +				   freeable_objects, scan_count,
> +				   total_scan, priority);
>  
>  	/*
>  	 * If the shrinker can't run (e.g. due to gfp_mask constraints), then
> @@ -564,7 +584,7 @@ static unsigned long do_shrink_slab(struct shrink_control *shrinkctl,
>  	 * possible.
>  	 */
>  	while (total_scan >= batch_size ||
> -	       total_scan >= freeable) {
> +	       total_scan >= freeable_objects) {
>  		unsigned long ret;
>  		unsigned long nr_to_scan = min(batch_size, total_scan);
>  
> 

  reply	other threads:[~2019-08-02 15:08 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 87+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2019-08-01  2:17 [RFC] [PATCH 00/24] mm, xfs: non-blocking inode reclaim Dave Chinner
2019-08-01  2:17 ` [PATCH 01/24] mm: directed shrinker work deferral Dave Chinner
2019-08-02 15:27   ` Brian Foster
2019-08-04  1:49     ` Dave Chinner
2019-08-05 17:42       ` Brian Foster
2019-08-05 23:43         ` Dave Chinner
2019-08-06 12:27           ` Brian Foster
2019-08-06 22:22             ` Dave Chinner
2019-08-07 11:13               ` Brian Foster
2019-08-01  2:17 ` [PATCH 02/24] shrinkers: use will_defer for GFP_NOFS sensitive shrinkers Dave Chinner
2019-08-02 15:27   ` Brian Foster
2019-08-04  1:50     ` Dave Chinner
2019-08-01  2:17 ` [PATCH 03/24] mm: factor shrinker work calculations Dave Chinner
2019-08-02 15:08   ` Nikolay Borisov [this message]
2019-08-04  2:05     ` Dave Chinner
2019-08-02 15:31   ` Brian Foster
2019-08-01  2:17 ` [PATCH 04/24] shrinker: defer work only to kswapd Dave Chinner
2019-08-02 15:34   ` Brian Foster
2019-08-04 16:48   ` Nikolay Borisov
2019-08-04 21:37     ` Dave Chinner
2019-08-07 16:12   ` kbuild test robot
2019-08-07 18:00   ` kbuild test robot
2019-08-01  2:17 ` [PATCH 05/24] shrinker: clean up variable types and tracepoints Dave Chinner
2019-08-01  2:17 ` [PATCH 06/24] mm: reclaim_state records pages reclaimed, not slabs Dave Chinner
2019-08-01  2:17 ` [PATCH 07/24] mm: back off direct reclaim on excessive shrinker deferral Dave Chinner
2019-08-01  2:17 ` [PATCH 08/24] mm: kswapd backoff for shrinkers Dave Chinner
2019-08-01  2:17 ` [PATCH 09/24] xfs: don't allow log IO to be throttled Dave Chinner
2019-08-01 13:39   ` Chris Mason
2019-08-01 23:58     ` Dave Chinner
2019-08-02  8:12       ` Christoph Hellwig
2019-08-02 14:11       ` Chris Mason
2019-08-02 18:34         ` Matthew Wilcox
2019-08-02 23:28         ` Dave Chinner
2019-08-05 18:32           ` Chris Mason
2019-08-05 23:09             ` Dave Chinner
2019-08-01  2:17 ` [PATCH 10/24] xfs: fix missed wakeup on l_flush_wait Dave Chinner
2019-08-01  2:17 ` [PATCH 11/24] xfs:: account for memory freed from metadata buffers Dave Chinner
2019-08-01  8:16   ` Christoph Hellwig
2019-08-01  9:21     ` Dave Chinner
2019-08-06  5:51       ` Christoph Hellwig
2019-08-01  2:17 ` [PATCH 12/24] xfs: correctly acount for reclaimable slabs Dave Chinner
2019-08-06  5:52   ` Christoph Hellwig
2019-08-06 21:05     ` Dave Chinner
2019-08-01  2:17 ` [PATCH 13/24] xfs: synchronous AIL pushing Dave Chinner
2019-08-05 17:51   ` Brian Foster
2019-08-05 23:21     ` Dave Chinner
2019-08-06 12:29       ` Brian Foster
2019-08-01  2:17 ` [PATCH 14/24] xfs: tail updates only need to occur when LSN changes Dave Chinner
2019-08-05 17:53   ` Brian Foster
2019-08-05 23:28     ` Dave Chinner
2019-08-06  5:33       ` Dave Chinner
2019-08-06 12:53         ` Brian Foster
2019-08-06 21:11           ` Dave Chinner
2019-08-01  2:17 ` [PATCH 15/24] xfs: eagerly free shadow buffers to reduce CIL footprint Dave Chinner
2019-08-05 18:03   ` Brian Foster
2019-08-05 23:33     ` Dave Chinner
2019-08-06 12:57       ` Brian Foster
2019-08-06 21:21         ` Dave Chinner
2019-08-01  2:17 ` [PATCH 16/24] xfs: Lower CIL flush limit for large logs Dave Chinner
2019-08-04 17:12   ` Nikolay Borisov
2019-08-01  2:17 ` [PATCH 17/24] xfs: don't block kswapd in inode reclaim Dave Chinner
2019-08-06 18:21   ` Brian Foster
2019-08-06 21:27     ` Dave Chinner
2019-08-07 11:14       ` Brian Foster
2019-08-01  2:17 ` [PATCH 18/24] xfs: reduce kswapd blocking on inode locking Dave Chinner
2019-08-06 18:22   ` Brian Foster
2019-08-06 21:33     ` Dave Chinner
2019-08-07 11:30       ` Brian Foster
2019-08-07 23:16         ` Dave Chinner
2019-08-01  2:17 ` [PATCH 19/24] xfs: kill background reclaim work Dave Chinner
2019-08-01  2:17 ` [PATCH 20/24] xfs: use AIL pushing for inode reclaim IO Dave Chinner
2019-08-07 18:09   ` Brian Foster
2019-08-07 23:10     ` Dave Chinner
2019-08-08 16:20       ` Brian Foster
2019-08-01  2:17 ` [PATCH 21/24] xfs: remove mode from xfs_reclaim_inodes() Dave Chinner
2019-08-01  2:17 ` [PATCH 22/24] xfs: track reclaimable inodes using a LRU list Dave Chinner
2019-08-08 16:36   ` Brian Foster
2019-08-09  0:10     ` Dave Chinner
2019-08-01  2:17 ` [PATCH 23/24] xfs: reclaim inodes from the LRU Dave Chinner
2019-08-08 16:39   ` Brian Foster
2019-08-09  1:20     ` Dave Chinner
2019-08-09 12:36       ` Brian Foster
2019-08-11  2:17         ` Dave Chinner
2019-08-11 12:46           ` Brian Foster
2019-08-01  2:17 ` [PATCH 24/24] xfs: remove unusued old inode reclaim code Dave Chinner
2019-08-06  5:57 ` [RFC] [PATCH 00/24] mm, xfs: non-blocking inode reclaim Christoph Hellwig
2019-08-06 21:37   ` Dave Chinner

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=e07bf57b-a9cb-cb7b-b2be-3ec1b355a184@suse.com \
    --to=nborisov@suse.com \
    --cc=david@fromorbit.com \
    --cc=linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
    --cc=linux-xfs@vger.kernel.org \
    /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.