linux-kernel.vger.kernel.org archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Michal Hocko <mhocko@kernel.org>
To: Minchan Kim <minchan@kernel.org>
Cc: Johannes Weiner <hannes@cmpxchg.org>,
	Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
	Mel Gorman <mgorman@techsingularity.net>,
	kernel-team@lge.com, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
	linux-mm@kvack.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] vmscan: scan pages until it founds eligible pages
Date: Wed, 10 May 2017 08:13:12 +0200	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20170510061312.GB26158@dhcp22.suse.cz> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20170510014654.GA23584@bbox>

On Wed 10-05-17 10:46:54, Minchan Kim wrote:
> On Wed, May 03, 2017 at 08:00:44AM +0200, Michal Hocko wrote:
[...]
> > @@ -1486,6 +1486,12 @@ static unsigned long isolate_lru_pages(unsigned long nr_to_scan,
> >  			continue;
> >  		}
> >  
> > +		/*
> > +		 * Do not count skipped pages because we do want to isolate
> > +		 * some pages even when the LRU mostly contains ineligible
> > +		 * pages
> > +		 */
> 
> How about adding comment about "why"?
> 
> /*
>  * Do not count skipped pages because it makes the function to return with
>  * none isolated pages if the LRU mostly contains inelgible pages so that
>  * VM cannot reclaim any pages and trigger premature OOM.
>  */

I am not sure this is necessarily any better. Mentioning a pre-mature
OOM would require a much better explanation because a first immediate
question would be "why don't we scan those pages at priority 0". Also
decision about the OOM is at a different layer and it might change in
future when this doesn't apply any more. But it is not like I would
insist...

> > +		scan++;
> >  		switch (__isolate_lru_page(page, mode)) {
> >  		case 0:
> >  			nr_pages = hpage_nr_pages(page);
> 
> Confirmed.

Hmm. I can clearly see how we could skip over too many pages and hit
small reclaim priorities too quickly but I am still scratching my head
about how we could hit the OOM killer as a result. The amount of pages
on the active anonymous list suggests that we are not able to rotate
pages quickly enough. I have to keep thinking about that.

> It works as expected but it changed scan counter's behavior.  How
> about this?

OK, it looks good to me. I believe the main motivation of the original
patch from Johannes was to drop the magical total_skipped.
 
> diff --git a/mm/vmscan.c b/mm/vmscan.c
> index 2314aca47d12..846922d7942e 100644
> --- a/mm/vmscan.c
> +++ b/mm/vmscan.c
> @@ -1469,7 +1469,7 @@ static __always_inline void update_lru_sizes(struct lruvec *lruvec,
>   *
>   * Appropriate locks must be held before calling this function.
>   *
> - * @nr_to_scan:	The number of pages to look through on the list.
> + * @nr_to_scan:	The number of eligible pages to look through on the list.
>   * @lruvec:	The LRU vector to pull pages from.
>   * @dst:	The temp list to put pages on to.
>   * @nr_scanned:	The number of pages that were scanned.
> @@ -1489,11 +1489,13 @@ static unsigned long isolate_lru_pages(unsigned long nr_to_scan,
>  	unsigned long nr_zone_taken[MAX_NR_ZONES] = { 0 };
>  	unsigned long nr_skipped[MAX_NR_ZONES] = { 0, };
>  	unsigned long skipped = 0;
> -	unsigned long scan, nr_pages;
> +	unsigned long scan, total_scan, nr_pages;
>  	LIST_HEAD(pages_skipped);
>  
> -	for (scan = 0; scan < nr_to_scan && nr_taken < nr_to_scan &&
> -					!list_empty(src); scan++) {
> +	for (total_scan = scan = 0; scan < nr_to_scan &&
> +					nr_taken < nr_to_scan &&
> +					!list_empty(src);
> +					total_scan++) {
>  		struct page *page;
>  
>  		page = lru_to_page(src);
> @@ -1507,6 +1509,13 @@ static unsigned long isolate_lru_pages(unsigned long nr_to_scan,
>  			continue;
>  		}
>  
> +		/*
> +		 * Do not count skipped pages because it makes the function to
> +		 * return with none isolated pages if the LRU mostly contains
> +		 * inelgible pages so that VM cannot reclaim any pages and
> +		 * trigger premature OOM.
> +		 */
> +		scan++;
>  		switch (__isolate_lru_page(page, mode)) {
>  		case 0:
>  			nr_pages = hpage_nr_pages(page);
> @@ -1544,9 +1553,9 @@ static unsigned long isolate_lru_pages(unsigned long nr_to_scan,
>  			skipped += nr_skipped[zid];
>  		}
>  	}
> -	*nr_scanned = scan;
> +	*nr_scanned = total_scan;
>  	trace_mm_vmscan_lru_isolate(sc->reclaim_idx, sc->order, nr_to_scan,
> -				    scan, skipped, nr_taken, mode, lru);
> +				    total_scan, skipped, nr_taken, mode, lru);
>  	update_lru_sizes(lruvec, lru, nr_zone_taken);
>  	return nr_taken;
>  }

-- 
Michal Hocko
SUSE Labs

  reply	other threads:[~2017-05-10  6:13 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 10+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
     [not found] <1493700038-27091-1-git-send-email-minchan@kernel.org>
2017-05-02  5:14 ` [PATCH] vmscan: scan pages until it founds eligible pages Minchan Kim
2017-05-02  7:54   ` Michal Hocko
2017-05-02 14:51     ` Minchan Kim
2017-05-02 15:14       ` Michal Hocko
2017-05-03  4:48         ` Minchan Kim
2017-05-03  6:00           ` Michal Hocko
2017-05-10  1:46             ` Minchan Kim
2017-05-10  6:13               ` Michal Hocko [this message]
2017-05-10  7:03                 ` Minchan Kim
2017-05-10  7:22                   ` 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=20170510061312.GB26158@dhcp22.suse.cz \
    --to=mhocko@kernel.org \
    --cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
    --cc=hannes@cmpxchg.org \
    --cc=kernel-team@lge.com \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
    --cc=mgorman@techsingularity.net \
    --cc=minchan@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 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).