All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: lipeifeng@oppo.com
To: lipeifeng@oppo.com, akpm@linux-foundation.org,
	david@fromorbit.com, zhengqi.arch@bytedance.com,
	roman.gushchin@linux.dev, muchun.song@linux.dev
Cc: linux-mm@kvack.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: [PATCH] mm/shrinker: add SHRINKER_NO_DIRECT_RECLAIM
Date: Fri, 12 Apr 2024 16:07:06 +0800	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20240412080706.744-1-lipeifeng@oppo.com> (raw)

From: Peifeng Li <lipeifeng@oppo.com>

In the case of insufficient memory, threads will be in direct_reclaim to
reclaim memory, direct_reclaim will call shrink_slab to run sequentially
each shrinker callback. If there is a lock-contention in the shrinker
callback,such as spinlock,mutex_lock and so on, threads may be likely to
be stuck in direct_reclaim for a long time, even if the memfree has reached
the high watermarks of the zone, resulting in poor performance of threads.

Example 1: shrinker callback may wait for spinlock
static unsigned long mb_cache_shrink(struct mb_cache *cache,
                                     unsigned long nr_to_scan)
{
        struct mb_cache_entry *entry;
        unsigned long shrunk = 0;

        spin_lock(&cache->c_list_lock);
        while (nr_to_scan-- && !list_empty(&cache->c_list)) {
                entry = list_first_entry(&cache->c_list,
                                         struct mb_cache_entry, e_list);
                if (test_bit(MBE_REFERENCED_B, &entry->e_flags) ||
                    atomic_cmpxchg(&entry->e_refcnt, 1, 0) != 1) {
                        clear_bit(MBE_REFERENCED_B, &entry->e_flags);
                        list_move_tail(&entry->e_list, &cache->c_list);
                        continue;
                }
                list_del_init(&entry->e_list);
                cache->c_entry_count--;
                spin_unlock(&cache->c_list_lock);
                __mb_cache_entry_free(cache, entry);
                shrunk++;
                cond_resched();
                spin_lock(&cache->c_list_lock);
        }
        spin_unlock(&cache->c_list_lock);

        return shrunk;
}
Example 2: shrinker callback may wait for mutex lock
static
unsigned long kbase_mem_evictable_reclaim_scan_objects(struct shrinker *s,
		struct shrink_control *sc)
{
	struct kbase_context *kctx;
	struct kbase_mem_phy_alloc *alloc;
	struct kbase_mem_phy_alloc *tmp;
	unsigned long freed = 0;

	kctx = container_of(s, struct kbase_context, reclaim);

	// MTK add to prevent false alarm
	lockdep_off();

	mutex_lock(&kctx->jit_evict_lock);

	list_for_each_entry_safe(alloc, tmp, &kctx->evict_list, evict_node) {
		int err;

		err = kbase_mem_shrink_gpu_mapping(kctx, alloc->reg,
				0, alloc->nents);
		if (err != 0) {
			freed = -1;
			goto out_unlock;
		}

		alloc->evicted = alloc->nents;

		kbase_free_phy_pages_helper(alloc, alloc->evicted);
		freed += alloc->evicted;
		list_del_init(&alloc->evict_node);

		kbase_jit_backing_lost(alloc->reg);

		if (freed > sc->nr_to_scan)
			break;
	}
out_unlock:
	mutex_unlock(&kctx->jit_evict_lock);

	// MTK add to prevent false alarm
	lockdep_on();

	return freed;
}

In mobile-phone,threads are likely to be stuck in shrinker callback during
direct_reclaim, with example like the following:
<...>-2806    [004] ..... 866458.339840: mm_shrink_slab_start:
			dynamic_mem_shrink_scan+0x0/0xb8 ... priority 2
<...>-2806    [004] ..... 866459.339933: mm_shrink_slab_end:
			dynamic_mem_shrink_scan+0x0/0xb8 ...

For the above reason, the patch introduces SHRINKER_NO_DIRECT_RECLAIM that
allows driver to set shrinker callback not to be called in direct_reclaim
unless sc->priority is 0.

The reason why sc->priority=0 allows shrinker callback to be called in
direct_reclaim is for two reasons:
1.Always call all shrinker callback in drop_slab that priority is 0.
2.sc->priority is 0 during direct_reclaim, allow direct_reclaim to call
shrinker callback, to reclaim memory timely.

Note:
1.Register_shrinker_prepared() default not to set
SHRINKER_NO_DIRECT_RECLAIM, to maintain the current behavior of the code.
2.Logic of kswapd and drop_slab to call shrinker callback isn't affected.

Signed-off-by: Peifeng Li <lipeifeng@oppo.com>
---
 include/linux/shrinker.h |  5 +++++
 mm/shrinker.c            | 36 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++--
 2 files changed, 39 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)

diff --git a/include/linux/shrinker.h b/include/linux/shrinker.h
index 1a00be90d93a..2d5a8b3a720b 100644
--- a/include/linux/shrinker.h
+++ b/include/linux/shrinker.h
@@ -130,6 +130,11 @@ struct shrinker {
  * non-MEMCG_AWARE shrinker should not have this flag set.
  */
 #define SHRINKER_NONSLAB	BIT(4)
+/*
+ * Can shrinker callback be called in direct_relcaim unless
+ * sc->priority is 0?
+ */
+#define SHRINKER_NO_DIRECT_RECLAIM	BIT(5)
 
 __printf(2, 3)
 struct shrinker *shrinker_alloc(unsigned int flags, const char *fmt, ...);
diff --git a/mm/shrinker.c b/mm/shrinker.c
index dc5d2a6fcfc4..3ac50da72494 100644
--- a/mm/shrinker.c
+++ b/mm/shrinker.c
@@ -544,7 +544,23 @@ static unsigned long shrink_slab_memcg(gfp_t gfp_mask, int nid,
 			if (!memcg_kmem_online() &&
 			    !(shrinker->flags & SHRINKER_NONSLAB))
 				continue;
-
+			/*
+			 * SHRINKER_NO_DIRECT_RECLAIM, mean that shrinker callback
+			 * should not be called in direct_reclaim unless priority
+			 * is 0.
+			 */
+			if ((shrinker->flags & SHRINKER_NO_DIRECT_RECLAIM) &&
+					!current_is_kswapd()) {
+				/*
+				 * 1.Always call shrinker callback in drop_slab that
+				 * priority is 0.
+				 * 2.sc->priority is 0 during direct_reclaim, allow
+				 * direct_reclaim to call shrinker callback, to reclaim
+				 * memory timely.
+				 */
+				if (priority)
+					continue;
+			}
 			ret = do_shrink_slab(&sc, shrinker, priority);
 			if (ret == SHRINK_EMPTY) {
 				clear_bit(offset, unit->map);
@@ -658,7 +674,23 @@ unsigned long shrink_slab(gfp_t gfp_mask, int nid, struct mem_cgroup *memcg,
 			continue;
 
 		rcu_read_unlock();
-
+		/*
+		 * SHRINKER_NO_DIRECT_RECLAIM, mean that shrinker callback
+		 * should not be called in direct_reclaim unless priority
+		 * is 0.
+		 */
+		if ((shrinker->flags & SHRINKER_NO_DIRECT_RECLAIM) &&
+				!current_is_kswapd()) {
+			/*
+			 * 1.Always call shrinker callback in drop_slab that
+			 * priority is 0.
+			 * 2.sc->priority is 0 during direct_reclaim, allow
+			 * direct_reclaim to call shrinker callback, to reclaim
+			 * memory timely.
+			 */
+			if (priority)
+				continue;
+		}
 		ret = do_shrink_slab(&sc, shrinker, priority);
 		if (ret == SHRINK_EMPTY)
 			ret = 0;
-- 
2.34.1


             reply	other threads:[~2024-04-12  8:07 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 3+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2024-04-12  8:07 lipeifeng [this message]
2024-04-12  8:47 ` [PATCH] mm/shrinker: add SHRINKER_NO_DIRECT_RECLAIM Qi Zheng
2024-04-13  1:38   ` 李培锋

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=20240412080706.744-1-lipeifeng@oppo.com \
    --to=lipeifeng@oppo.com \
    --cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
    --cc=david@fromorbit.com \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
    --cc=muchun.song@linux.dev \
    --cc=roman.gushchin@linux.dev \
    --cc=zhengqi.arch@bytedance.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.