From: Josef Bacik <josef@toxicpanda.com>
To: Minchan Kim <minchan@kernel.org>
Cc: josef@toxicpanda.com, akpm@linux-foundation.org,
kernel-team@fb.com, linux-mm@kvack.org, hannes@cmpxchg.org,
riel@redhat.com, Josef Bacik <jbacik@fb.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/4][v2] vmscan: bailout of slab reclaim once we reach our target
Date: Wed, 5 Jul 2017 08:57:26 -0400 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20170705125725.GA16179@destiny> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20170705042704.GA20079@bbox>
On Wed, Jul 05, 2017 at 01:27:04PM +0900, Minchan Kim wrote:
> On Tue, Jul 04, 2017 at 08:33:38AM -0400, josef@toxicpanda.com wrote:
> > From: Josef Bacik <jbacik@fb.com>
> >
> > Following patches will greatly increase our aggressiveness in slab
> > reclaim, so we need checks in place to make sure we stop trying to
> > reclaim slab once we've hit our reclaim target.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Josef Bacik <jbacik@fb.com>
> > ---
> > v1->v2:
> > - Don't bail out in shrink_slab() so that we always scan at least batch_size
> > objects of every slab regardless of wether we've hit our target or not.
>
> It's no different with v1 for aging fairness POV.
>
> Imagine you have 3 shrinkers in shrinker_list and A has a lots of objects.
>
> HEAD-> A -> B -> C
>
> shrink_slab does scan/reclaims from A srhinker a lot until it meets
> sc->nr_to_reclaim. Then, VM does aging B and C with batch_size which is
> rather small. It breaks fairness.
>
> In next memory pressure, it shrinks A a lot again but B and C
> a little bit.
>
Oh duh yeah I see what you are saying. I had a scheme previously to break up
the scanning targets based on overall usage but it meant looping through the
shrinkers twice, as we have to get a total count of objects first to determine
individual ratios. I suppose since there's relatively low cost to getting
object counts per shrinker and there don't tend to be a lot of shrinkers we
could go with this to make it more fair. I'll write this up. Thanks,
Josef
--
To unsubscribe, send a message with 'unsubscribe linux-mm' in
the body to majordomo@kvack.org. For more info on Linux MM,
see: http://www.linux-mm.org/ .
Don't email: <a href=mailto:"dont@kvack.org"> email@kvack.org </a>
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2017-07-05 12:57 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 6+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2017-07-04 12:33 [PATCH 1/4] vmscan: push reclaim_state down to shrink_node() josef
2017-07-04 12:33 ` [PATCH 2/4][v2] vmscan: bailout of slab reclaim once we reach our target josef
2017-07-05 4:27 ` Minchan Kim
2017-07-05 12:57 ` Josef Bacik [this message]
2017-07-04 12:33 ` [PATCH 3/4] mm: use slab size in the slab shrinking ratio calculation josef
2017-07-04 12:33 ` [PATCH 4/4] mm: make kswapd try harder to keep active pages in cache josef
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=20170705125725.GA16179@destiny \
--to=josef@toxicpanda.com \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=hannes@cmpxchg.org \
--cc=jbacik@fb.com \
--cc=kernel-team@fb.com \
--cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
--cc=minchan@kernel.org \
--cc=riel@redhat.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.