From: Johannes Weiner <hannes@cmpxchg.org>
To: Shakeel Butt <shakeelb@google.com>
Cc: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
Andrey Ryabinin <aryabinin@virtuozzo.com>,
Suren Baghdasaryan <surenb@google.com>,
Rik van Riel <riel@surriel.com>, Michal Hocko <mhocko@suse.com>,
Linux MM <linux-mm@kvack.org>, Cgroups <cgroups@vger.kernel.org>,
LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
Kernel Team <kernel-team@fb.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/3] mm: vmscan: detect file thrashing at the reclaim root
Date: Fri, 15 Nov 2019 11:07:22 -0500 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20191115160722.GA309754@cmpxchg.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CALvZod5y2NPPg=24q33=ktQqwyUsH1gpwHgROe5z_P+tW74SDw@mail.gmail.com>
On Thu, Nov 14, 2019 at 03:47:59PM -0800, Shakeel Butt wrote:
> On Thu, Nov 7, 2019 at 12:53 PM Johannes Weiner <hannes@cmpxchg.org> wrote:
> >
> > We use refault information to determine whether the cache workingset
> > is stable or transitioning, and dynamically adjust the inactive:active
> > file LRU ratio so as to maximize protection from one-off cache during
> > stable periods, and minimize IO during transitions.
> >
> > With cgroups and their nested LRU lists, we currently don't do this
> > correctly. While recursive cgroup reclaim establishes a relative LRU
> > order among the pages of all involved cgroups, refaults only affect
> > the local LRU order in the cgroup in which they are occuring. As a
> > result, cache transitions can take longer in a cgrouped system as the
> > active pages of sibling cgroups aren't challenged when they should be.
> >
> > [ Right now, this is somewhat theoretical, because the siblings, under
> > continued regular reclaim pressure, should eventually run out of
> > inactive pages - and since inactive:active *size* balancing is also
> > done on a cgroup-local level, we will challenge the active pages
> > eventually in most cases. But the next patch will move that relative
> > size enforcement to the reclaim root as well, and then this patch
> > here will be necessary to propagate refault pressure to siblings. ]
> >
> > This patch moves refault detection to the root of reclaim. Instead of
> > remembering the cgroup owner of an evicted page, remember the cgroup
> > that caused the reclaim to happen. When refaults later occur, they'll
> > correctly influence the cross-cgroup LRU order that reclaim follows.
>
> Can you please explain how "they'll correctly influence"? I see that
> if the refaulted page was evicted due to pressure in some ancestor,
> then that's ancestor's refault distance and active file size will be
> used to decide to activate the refaulted page but how that is
> influencing cross-cgroup LRUs?
I take it the next patch answered your question: Activating a page
inside a cgroup has an effect on how it's reclaimed relative to pages
in sibling cgroups. So the influence part isn't new with this change -
it's about recognizing that an activation has an effect on a wider
scope than just the local cgroup, and considering that scope when
making the decision whether to activate or not.
> > @@ -302,6 +330,17 @@ void workingset_refault(struct page *page, void *shadow)
> > */
> > refault_distance = (refault - eviction) & EVICTION_MASK;
> >
> > + /*
> > + * The activation decision for this page is made at the level
> > + * where the eviction occurred, as that is where the LRU order
> > + * during page reclaim is being determined.
> > + *
> > + * However, the cgroup that will own the page is the one that
> > + * is actually experiencing the refault event.
> > + */
> > + memcg = get_mem_cgroup_from_mm(current->mm);
>
> Why not page_memcg(page)? page is locked.
Nice catch! Indeed, the page is charged and locked at this point, so
we don't have to do another lookup and refcounting dance here.
Delta patch:
---
From 8984f37f3e88b1b39c7d6470b313730093b24474 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Johannes Weiner <hannes@cmpxchg.org>
Date: Fri, 15 Nov 2019 09:14:04 -0500
Subject: [PATCH] mm: vmscan: detect file thrashing at the reclaim root fix
Shakeel points out that the page is locked and already charged by the
time we call workingset_refault(). Instead of doing another cgroup
lookup and reference from current->mm we can simply use page_memcg().
Signed-off-by: Johannes Weiner <hannes@cmpxchg.org>
---
mm/workingset.c | 7 ++-----
1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-)
diff --git a/mm/workingset.c b/mm/workingset.c
index f0885d9f41cd..474186b76ced 100644
--- a/mm/workingset.c
+++ b/mm/workingset.c
@@ -338,7 +338,7 @@ void workingset_refault(struct page *page, void *shadow)
* However, the cgroup that will own the page is the one that
* is actually experiencing the refault event.
*/
- memcg = get_mem_cgroup_from_mm(current->mm);
+ memcg = page_memcg(page);
lruvec = mem_cgroup_lruvec(memcg, pgdat);
inc_lruvec_state(lruvec, WORKINGSET_REFAULT);
@@ -349,7 +349,7 @@ void workingset_refault(struct page *page, void *shadow)
* the memory was available to the page cache.
*/
if (refault_distance > active_file)
- goto out_memcg;
+ goto out;
SetPageActive(page);
advance_inactive_age(memcg, pgdat);
@@ -360,9 +360,6 @@ void workingset_refault(struct page *page, void *shadow)
SetPageWorkingset(page);
inc_lruvec_state(lruvec, WORKINGSET_RESTORE);
}
-
-out_memcg:
- mem_cgroup_put(memcg);
out:
rcu_read_unlock();
}
--
2.24.0
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2019-11-15 16:07 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 23+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2019-11-07 20:53 [PATCH 0/3] mm: fix page aging across multiple cgroups Johannes Weiner
2019-11-07 20:53 ` [PATCH 1/3] mm: vmscan: move file exhaustion detection to the node level Johannes Weiner
2019-11-10 22:02 ` Suren Baghdasaryan
2019-11-10 22:09 ` Khadarnimcaan Khadarnimcaan
2019-11-07 20:53 ` [PATCH 2/3] mm: vmscan: detect file thrashing at the reclaim root Johannes Weiner
2019-11-11 2:01 ` Suren Baghdasaryan
2019-11-12 17:45 ` Johannes Weiner
2019-11-12 18:45 ` Suren Baghdasaryan
2019-11-12 18:59 ` Johannes Weiner
2019-11-12 20:35 ` Suren Baghdasaryan
2019-11-14 23:47 ` Shakeel Butt
2019-11-15 16:07 ` Johannes Weiner [this message]
2019-11-15 16:52 ` Shakeel Butt
2020-02-12 10:28 ` Joonsoo Kim
2020-02-12 18:18 ` Johannes Weiner
2020-02-14 1:17 ` Joonsoo Kim
2019-11-07 20:53 ` [PATCH 3/3] mm: vmscan: enforce inactive:active ratio " Johannes Weiner
2019-11-11 2:15 ` Suren Baghdasaryan
2019-11-12 18:00 ` Johannes Weiner
2019-11-12 19:13 ` Suren Baghdasaryan
2019-11-12 20:34 ` Suren Baghdasaryan
2019-11-15 0:29 ` Shakeel Butt
2019-11-27 22:16 ` Shakeel Butt
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=20191115160722.GA309754@cmpxchg.org \
--to=hannes@cmpxchg.org \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=aryabinin@virtuozzo.com \
--cc=cgroups@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=kernel-team@fb.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
--cc=mhocko@suse.com \
--cc=riel@surriel.com \
--cc=shakeelb@google.com \
--cc=surenb@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 a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).